Actually, my advice is the opposite. Put your templates in a template directory, and then keep the .html suffix. Then, when I load the file in most html editors, they recognise it immediately from the suffix. They don't quite "get" the tmpl_ tags, but I can highlight things and mark them "strong" or "em"phasis or "div" or whatever. (For some reason, I don't think my editor allows blink. Oh well :-})
This way, I get all the shortcuts for adding tags, I get the syntax highlighting, and I know they're templates from the directory they're in.
I actually started with your advice: new name, outside directory. I went back on the name because I found I was always telling my editor to pretend that .tmpl was actually HTML, so I cheated by putting them in files that the editor understood were HTML.
And I'm even more glad I did now - I have another templating system based on Text::ScriptTemplate that I use at work where .tmpl is now taken for that - and having my editor autoload .tmpl as HTML would make those look very, very silly. (No, that's not used for webpages, but for almost anything else - including shell scripts.)
In reply to Re^2: Can a Template file be an HTML file?
by Tanktalus
in thread Can a Template file be an HTML file?
by Anonymous Monk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |