What are common file extensions for web programming languages?

views:

359

answers:

+2 Q:

What are common file extensions for web programming languages?

What file extensions are used most commonly by different languages? Please don't put source file names (like .java) but rather extensions that would be present in a URL for rendered pages.

Here is my (alphabetized) list so far

ASP Classic
- asp
ASP.NET
- aspx
- axd
- asx
- asmx
- ashx
CSS
- css
Coldfusion
- cfm
Erlang
- yaws
Flash
- swf
HTML
- html
- htm
- xhtml
Java
- jsp
- jspx
- wss
- do
- action
JavaScript
- js
Perl
- pl
PHP
- php
- php4
- php3
- phtml
Python
- py
Ruby
- rb
- rhtml
XML
- xml
- rss
- svg
Other (C, perl etc.)
- cgi
- dll

Any more? I'll keep updating this based on comments. Largest correct additions (or deletions) is the accepted answer.

Aside: This is for comparing language use online: http://blog.paulisageek.com/2009/10/file-extensions-on-internet.html

.yaws (Erlang Yaws Web Server)

jldupont 2009-10-23 16:24:46

Added, but not much on the net http://www.google.com/search?q=ext%3Ayaws

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 16:28:20

.js, .html, .htm, .xhtml probably deserve a nod.

Dean J 2009-10-23 16:26:20

Good call. Added

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 16:27:20

.aspx .asp .css

Daren Schwenke 2009-10-23 16:28:17

Added asp and css.

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 16:29:28

.action -- struts2

.do -- struts1

.xml -- XML

.rss -- RSS feeds

.atom -- Atom feeds(RSS)

(no extension) -- used now a days to increase readability of the URL, check stackoverflow URL

Xinus 2009-10-23 16:29:04

What language is struts? is it a framework for java?

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 16:30:04

yep....................

Xinus 2009-10-23 16:32:31

added. thanks..

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 16:35:02

Ruby on Rails also uses the following internally for templates (files that are mostly HTML or JavaScript). So they're not really public facing, and are transparent to the end user/robot.

.html.erb
.erb
.rjs

Used to be that most CGI scripts were written in Perl.

EmFi 2009-10-23 16:29:14

I'm tentative about adding CGI to perl. I'll do more research. But I added those for ruby.

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 16:30:48

+9 A:

Keep in mind that good URL design will completely hide any underlying file types.

ndim 2009-10-23 16:29:51

Yup, this is why it is only approximate. A lot of people still don't do that.

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 16:31:53

now a days there are no extensions for increasing readability of the URL, check stackoverflow URL

Xinus 2009-10-23 16:58:01

correct. which is why i'm doing this study now before it is too late :)

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 17:06:07

AOLServer using Tcl - .adp

RHSeeger 2009-10-23 16:30:44

now you're pulling my leg. there are 0 of those online http://www.google.com/search?q=ext%3A.adp

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 16:32:58

AOLServer developers are, apparently, better at mapping clean URLs to the underlying pages I guess.

RHSeeger 2009-10-23 20:24:12

Add there:

ASP.NET
- .axd
- .asx
- .asmx
- .ashx
- .aspx

Cleiton 2009-10-23 16:31:11

Is ASP.NET == ASP?

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 16:32:23

No - completely different apart from the branding.

Lucas Jones 2009-10-23 16:57:14

ok, added. thanks.

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 17:05:30

If you're going to list .asmx for ASP.NET web services, then you should also list .svc for ASP.NET hosted WCF services.

Cylon Cat 2010-02-21 16:19:58

REBOL tends to use .r

But .cgi is also used by some for REBOL CGI scripts.

Sunanda 2009-10-23 16:46:02

most of the .r don't look like rebol to me. http://www.google.com/search?q=ext%3Ar . Do they look right to you?

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 16:48:04

I think those are just coincedences with people ending usernames with '.r'.

Lucas Jones 2009-10-23 16:59:20

even on the pages way down, they still look like garbage. sorry.

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 17:04:31

Not all [b].r[/]b is [b]REBOL[/b]. But much [b]REBOL CGI[/]b is [b].r[/b].

Sunanda 2009-10-24 05:31:21

ASP.NET needs a couple more, but I'm not sure this is exhaustive:

aspx
ascx
asmx (web services)

John Fisher 2009-10-23 16:59:35

added ascx. does the set look comprehensive now?

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 17:06:58

@Paul, that is much better.

John Fisher 2009-10-23 17:14:16

However you won't see the .ascx in a URL.

erikkallen 2009-10-23 20:21:30

Here's a few of the commonly-used (but rarely enforced) extensions for some CSS dialects:

.hss for hss style sheets
.sass for sass style sheets
.less for less css style sheets
.ccss or .pcss for clever css style sheets

Steve Losh 2009-10-23 17:09:00

interesting, I've never heard of them. They look more like source files than extensions of actual pages on the next. Am it correct?

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 19:58:33

**@Paul Tarjan:** Yes, that's what they are, but so are `py` and `rb`, so that's what I figured you were looking for.

Steve Losh 2009-10-24 22:44:53

Ruby also tended to use .rhtml in the past.

Stellent uses the .hcsp extension for its page templates.

I believe Django uses .dtl.

mbarnett 2009-10-23 18:31:14

I've never heard of anyone using `.dtl` for Django templates. The overwhelmingly common standard seems to be using the extension of whatever kind of file the template will be rendered to. If it's producing a css file, it's `mytemplate.css`, if it's making an html file then `mytemplate.html`, etc.

Steve Losh 2009-10-24 22:46:19

Going old school: .cgi

Typically written in C or Perl

Matt Lacey 2009-10-23 18:37:49

heh, but what language? perl?

Paul Tarjan 2009-10-23 19:50:18

.java .cs and .i_am_kidding_i_read_the_question.

On the serious side, swf (Flash) get hidden by the JS that loads them, generally, but they are extensions usually seen by the client. This is a limit case because it's not like JPEG (doesn't allow for web programming) nor like Javascript. But then, neither is PHP/ASP/JSP because from the client side it's just markup :)

Yar 2010-01-25 00:32:57

IE specific strangeness:

.hta -- html application
.htc -- html components, allows you to alter IE behavior at runtime, from you website!

Also XML:

.svg -- it's not just an image format!

slebetman 2010-01-25 02:14:49

+1 A:

I am curious as to the adoption of jsf for Java based web applications. How does this compare to just regular old jsp. So, please add .jsf to the Java language group. Thanks

Grant 2010-02-21 16:01:22

ansaurus

tags:

views:

answers:

What are common file extensions for web programming languages?

related questions