Ian Bicking: the old part of his blog

Re: Ideal webapp layout comment 000

Agreed, "static" isn't too hot either. I think I'll just bite the bullet and go with "mimetypes", and categorize the static content in that way. I could see this approach becoming painful if you had a lot of different types, but for my usual scenario, there would just be text/javascript, text/css, and image/png; not too terrible, I think.

Comment on Ideal webapp layout comment 000
by L. Daniel Burr


But then you are just duplicating the file extensions in the directory layout. DRY, and all that. Some people are anti-file-extension, but I'm actually not in URLs (and definitely not on disk) at least insofar as the extension indicates the content type of the response, not the content type on disk.

There's so many ways to cut it, maybe "static" is the best because it's just the least complex.

# Ian Bicking

Like everything else in software engineering, this depends on your needs.

Have one js file that everything needs? One simple .css file that everything uses?

Sure, stick them in static.

Have a bazillion php files, each depending on a complex system of rules to generate the various CSS files it's using? Things get more complicated.

# Bob Joad