Re: [As-users] AfterStep 2.0 beta4 release
Graydon (oak@uniserve.com)
Wed, 24 Mar 2004 13:30:08 -0500
On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 06:39:13PM +0100, Christer Th?rn scripsit:
> Graydon wrote:
> >The extensions are a dos-descended hack everyone thinks is normal due to
> >extensive familiarity.
>
> "extensive familiarity" sound like a pretty good definition of
> "normal"... :)
That doesn't make it a good idea.
> Besides, isn't it better to look at it from an users perspective, rather
> than a formal filesystems? And users _do_ have different tastes, unlike
> formal filesystems, but there's not many of those using AS, me guess...
Of course not, but if you're going to have hand-editable configuration
files, you're going to have the question of what type they are. Should
they be 'afterstep' files or 'XML' files or 'generic configuration'
files? You can make a case for all of these; only the middle one has,
properly speaking, an extension.
This is one of the flaws with the idea of typing by extensions; overload
(think of all the things that have filetype 'XML') and limited numbers
of 'types' available.
> But if it's just about bashing Microsoft, ignore this msg and carry on.
The particular folly has crept into various linux apps, too; it's really
*not* a good idea.
--
oak@uniserve.com | Uton we hycgan hwaer we ham agen,
| ond thonne gedhencan he we thider cumen.
| -- The Seafarer, ll. 117-118.
_______________________________________________
As-users mailing list
As-users@afterstep.org
http://mail.afterstep.org/mailman/listinfo/as-users