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: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 16:35:06 +0100
Message-ID: <4907312A.6050604@w3.org>
To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
CC: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, public-owl-wg@w3.org
I may be wrong, but aren't usb sticks FAT based? If so, file suffixes
might go wrong when moving a file from one place to the other.

I might be wrong, though, and FAT is indeed not really used any more.
Unless one uses floppies:-)

Ivan

Bijan Parsia wrote:
> On Oct 28, 2008, at 11:16 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
> 
>> Bijan Parsia wrote:
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> But then, say, specialized editors running on my windows machine would
>> be screwed up:-(
> 
> How many of these are there, realistically? And, really? You use FAT
> formatted drives?
> 
> Dude, it's a new *millennium*! :)
> 
> Seriously, how often is this an in practice problem. No information is
> really lost as the formats are sniffable.
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan.
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Tuesday, 28 October 2008 15:44:04 UTC

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