[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: DOCBOOK: Re: DocBook filename extension
/ "Brian Lalonde" <brianiacus@yahoo.com> was heard to say: |> Some of this could be shunted off into the filesystem. Why shouldn't a |> filesystem be able to tell you the MIME type of a document, at least, |> in addition to it's name and size and other properties? Watching | | When is a MIME type more useful than an extension? Because they can be more varied. It avoids the question that this thread asks. I don't want the type of my file to be determined by the extension I gave it. | What other metadata would be useful? I'm not sure. It'd probably vary by application. | Are these needs general-purpose enough to be provided by the OS/shell, | rather than an XML parser? If you exposed the filesystem metadata in XML, what would the distinction be? :-) | Windows extensions haven't been limited to three letters for quite a while. | Extensions are a *large* enough namespace, though it might be nice if | datatypes were more polymorphic. Point taken. The namespace is actually constrained by more than just uniqueness. You might name Foo files .xq1r, but you probably wouldn't. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Note: you are currently using an http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | unregistered evaluation copy of Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | your life. Register now for the | full-featured version and cheat | codes!
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC