Re: Netscape 4.0 press release at their server

Scott E. Preece wrote:
> Yes, they *could* be standardized, but they have the disadvantage of
> being visible (unavoidably visible as opposed to visible when
wanted).

I consider visibility an advantage. W95 and NT4 default to having
extensions filtered off. Since I prefer a filename list to windows full
of big icons and folders and often launch launch applications by either
dblclicking a filename or dragging it to an app, I turn them back on.

> Actually, I would expect the database would be maintained
automatically
> - when you install an aplication it would install the types it knows
in
> the database.

The "types it knows" based on a registry maintained by Apple?

> I don't know what that sentence is trying to say.

When a file type is enhanced in some way, does it require a new
registration? If you must your system's file type registry from Apple's
database, doesn't it get larger each time?

> What application?  How do you know what application to feed it to?  

If I send you a pagemaker file from an NT system and there's no
extension, how do you know what application to feed it to? I have a Mac
Syquest cartridge sent by a printer who has the most obscure file
naming convention I have ever seen. If my system doesn't understand Mac
file numbers, how do I know what applications to feed these files to?

> With registered types you could at least find out what format it is,
so
> you could look for a converter or get the needed application.

Where do I find this info when the sender or poster is not polite
enough to tell me? Apple Computer? What if I also don't know that the
file came from a Mac?

> Actually, I've had much better luck with Macs than with UNIX, where I
> periodically download a file and have no way to guess what kind of a
> file it is.

One of my points. Better to standardize extensions for intersystem
transfers, just as with HTML, GIF, JPG, TXT, etc.

I don't think embedded file type codes registered with a central
database are a good idea and you do. It doesn't seem likely this dialog
will change any opinions.

David Perrell

Received on Tuesday, 22 October 1996 17:35:00 UTC