A Conversionary Question

A Conversionary user asked me the following question,
and I thought it might be useful to others if I shared it here.

When you build a site like your hunting site how do you make changes in the menu if you want to change it later? I know you
don’t re-build each book with the software and then re-upload because that would take too much time. Do you use server side includes or
something like that?

I use php include statements for most of the page, so I can change the whole design at any time if I wish.

I usually have the header part of the page in standard html, then everything from the closing <head> tag to the content in head.php, and everything after the content in foot.php, so my template looks something like:

<head><title><!--CUSTOM1--> <!--TITLE--></title>
<meta name=description content=<!--META-->>
<?php include "head.php"; ?>

by <h3><!--DOCAUTHOR--></h3>

[google ad code here]

<div align=center><hr size=1 width=50% noshade>
<a href="<!--PREVIOUS-->">Back</a>
<a href="<!--TOC-->">Contents</a>
<a href="<!--NEXT-->">Next</a></div>

< ?php include "foot.php"; ?>

I tend to start the include file before the closing head html tag so that I can include linked style sheets in the template.

Unless I want specific icons for the previous and next links, I can use this exact template for every site I work on with little or no modifications.

Server side includes would work just as well.

Thanks for your feedback!



  1. icooltools says:

    I read this article with interest. Will the extenstion of this page be .php or .html

  2. Wendy says:


    The extension depends on your web host. I’ve got my sites on three servers. One lets php code display on .html files, and one has a control panel widget that let me add extensions which allow php, so on those my extension is always .html

    On the third server, I use .php, because that’s the only extension they allow for running the code. There might be a way to get around it with an .htaccess file, but I’ve never bothered to try since, in my experience, Google isn’t particularly biased against any page extension as long as the page is static.

%d bloggers like this: