In article <[email protected]>, jonathon <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:38, Richard Travers wrote:
> > What exactly is wrong with using an extension to identify a file type? It > > is a simple, straightforward system that works. > Because that system _fails_ more often than it succeeds. > > it makes it immediately obvious from the file name what application is > > needed to open that file, > Take the extension ".bbl". > This is used for: > * TeX/BibTex files; > * e-Sword Bible resources; > * Pocket e-Sword Bible resources; > * At least five other mutually incompatible programs; > Take the extension ".wks". > This is used by: > * MSWorks; > * XLisp WorkSpace; > * Tandy Deskmate; > * Lotus 123; > Or maybe you prefer to explain how to differentiate between the ten > (or more) mutually incompatible file formats that use ".doc" as the > file extension. But there has to b e a system - whether it is a code incorporated in the file name, or a code incorporated in the file (there has to be some code or pattern or there is NO way of identifying the file). Your above examples say nothing about the method used to identify the file, only about the way it has been implemented. R. -- Richard Travers [email protected] Truro, Cornwall --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
