Joshua Juran: > [2] Fetishes include extensionless filenames
Ok, I’ll bite. I might’ve used extensionless filenames on my Linux desktop out of æsthetic reasons (which you might call fetishes and I’ll be happy about it), and I stopped because Nautilus wouldn’t create picture previews when the file was extensionless, but why do you actually *need* extensions for? Surely you can’t do anything serious with a file based solely on its extension, and I guess you’d rather my UI would not have to look at the header just to choose an icon for a file, *and* the shell completion is so much easier to code if it only has to consider extensions – but why wouldn’t a filesystem that, say, stores the file type in metadata, work better than extensions? // I agree that taking action based on that metadata would be // as (un)secure as taking action based on the extension, but // at least you wouldn’t be putting one specific file property // in its easily-user-alterable name. Disclaimer: I’m on a honeymoon and haven’t used a computer for quite a few days now, so I might be connecting from some kind of happy land that I won’t visit again in many years to come. Due apologies if I’m talking gibberish; I already assume I’ll be ashamed for what I wrote above when I’m back to the real reality. — Shot -- Frustrated By App Store Censors, Steve Wozniak Turns Tables, Writes iPhone Emulator on Apple II [patentlyfalse]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
