W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > October 2008

Re: agenda item for Teleconference 5 November on MIME types (ISSUE-145)

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 09:55:42 +0100
Message-Id: <A52B6DB1-A5CC-4145-A97F-FD30F699C9A1@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, public-owl-wg@w3.org
To: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>

On Oct 28, 2008, at 9:43 AM, Rinke Hoekstra wrote:

> On 28 okt 2008, at 09:06, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> What about '.owlx'?
>>
>> maybe as a matter of consistency we can also consider using 'owlf'  
>> and
>> 'owlm' for the other two.
>>
>> Ivan
>
> Although certainly prettier,

By leaps and bounds.

> I think it would create problems on FAT-based file systems that  
> (still) use the 8.3 naming scheme as these may truncate a long  
> extension to three characters.

But they would truncate to .owl, right? That seems harmless to me.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 28 October 2008 08:56:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:07 UTC