Re: Feature request: Alternative extension for .rhtml files

On 9/29/06, Hendy Irawan <gauldong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Will it be considered there be an alternative extension supported for
> .rhtml files?
> Aptana and Dreamweaver doesn't support it out of the box, and I'm too
> lazy to figure out how to configure (or re-configure) them to
> recognize .rhtml files as "plain" HTML files. Considering .rhtml files
> are mostly visual stuff (X/HTML) it's much nicer if I could edit them
> visually using these tools. For all else I'd prefer scite or radrails.
>

Alternatively someone could ask Dreamweaver nd Aptana to add .rhtml to
their supported extensions so they would be treated in a first class
fashion just like .asp, .jsp, .php, etc. RHTML is very similar in
regards to these and they are supported well inside most products.
Another reason to keep the name distinct is so that the editors can
infer additional functionality from the name. In the future when
Dreamweaver finally gets it, they will want to provide context
sensitve help for rhtml inline, so having the distinct name keeps
things clear and allow for these things to occur.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby 
on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rubyonrails-core-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---