We use .shtml files here. Can we get an option to switch to .shtml files?
And maybe an option when you create a new page to select between whether or not it is .html or .shtml?
I believe the file extension is irrelevant to the app it's self so it would just be a naming thing, the server is what deals with it like http vs. https.
Yes... big YES...
I need that, too.
But not this shtml... I need ".php"
Then I can put some custom-html Code in and the site will execute the php.
This will save lots of time
I think that it will be best to leave pages as .html in the interface, but we can add an option to the new Export dialog which we are planning. That option will allow you to enter a new extension which all your pages will be renamed to when they are exported. Do you think this will solve the problem you are facing?
@martin, That sounds fine to me. I can handle the bulk of pages nearly all as .shtml that way and then the one or two that can be renamed later or moved to a separate project to be exported that way.
@martin Do you still have plans on adding this? If so, when do you think it will be released?
Renaming all pages to a specified extension is not a good generic solution in my opinion.
Instead, ignore the file extension all together, and treat all pages with the built-in preview web server as HTML only.
Providing the option to specify a custom web server (i.e. http://localhost/mybtswebserver) for site previewing would be great when previewing sites with pages (i.e. PHP server pages) which require server-side parsing.
@karlo-spoljar96 We decided not to add functionality specifically for page extensions, and instead made a feature to run export scripts. You can write a script that renames all your pages after you export. This can be written in any scripting language that is installed on your system.
Have you also considered the option of running the external script on certain pages?
Renaming all pages to a certain extension seems only practical for sites where each page is first parsed on the server prior to being sent back to the client browser.
hi yes it would save renemaing ,, ty