November 30, 2008
Most of the sites I've managed have used content management systems that spit out static pages.
As such, I'm become a proponent of using server side includes (SSI) as a way to manage global site components, due to their simplicity and ease-of-use.
Nothing frustrates me more than when I'm told that a simple, global change to a static web site — such as changing the copyright year — is a major update because of all the pages that will need to be touched.
"Why don't you have these types of global elements, such as footers, set up as includes?" I often wonder to myself.
More recently however, I've been told that they are not an appropriate technique for managing high-traffic static sites due to the additional load they place on the server.
I'm not an overly technical person and so if a developer tells me that SSI are not the right way to go, I don't have a lot of ammunition with which to say otherwise.
So, my question is: are SSI an appropriate way to manage global parts of highly-trafficked static pages or have they gone the way of the splash page? Thanks for any wisdom anyone can impart.
Posted on: November 30, 2008 | No comments
Comments are closed for this entry.