If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
Wolf K on Thu, 14 Dec 2017 09:30:24 -0500 typed
in alt.windows7.general the following: Well done. Bottom line: it's way past time for standards. There's no reason for different OSs to handle filetype/tagging/etc differently. "Standards are wonderful things to have. Which is why we have so many of them." That was an old truism since before I went for the computer science degree. -- pyotr filipivich The question was asked: "Is Hindsight overrated?" In retrospect, it appears to be. |
Ads |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In message , Wolf K
writes: On 2017-12-14 00:24, Your Name wrote: On 2017-12-14 03:16:11 +0000, Wolf K said: On 2017-12-13 19:37, Your Name wrote: [...] * ... you can't rely on the OS to do that since a JPEG image file can actually be opened in a text editor as the file's data, even if it's rarely useful to do so. That's what Open With is for. Open With is near useless if you don't know what the file actually is. You'd have to Open With with every app you have until you found one that could open it properly. If we're talking about user convenience, I agree, showing a file's type as part of the filename is very useful. (But IMO a three-letter extension is too limited). There are many other useful conventions, eg, in icon design. These are converging on a common standard. How about this thought, to add fuel to the fire (stir, stir ...): the filename extension _is_ metadata. Not as intimately bound as metadata _within_ the file (because it _can_ be renamed), but arguably more closely bound than metadata in an attached spoon*. [As another has pointed out, they're not limited to three characters - though I would say three _is_ enough to allow an awful lot of filetypes!] If we're talking about choosing a program to open a file, extenions aren't needed. It would be easy to ensure that Open With offers only programs that can open a given file without reference to an extension. Just standardise metadata (eg, as a series of slots, some which must be filled, others for dev or user options). Easy peasy. "Just" standardise metadata. Good luck with that. (Plus - even if you did succeed - with converting all the already-existing files.) Have a good day, * Oh, all right, fork. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf "Bother," said Pooh, as Windows crashed into piglet. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In message Paul wrote:
Wolf K wrote: On 2017-12-14 00:24, Your Name wrote: On 2017-12-14 03:16:11 +0000, Wolf K said: On 2017-12-13 19:37, Your Name wrote: [...] ... you can't rely on the OS to do that since a JPEG image file can actually be opened in a text editor as the file's data, even if it's rarely useful to do so. That's what Open With is for. Open With is near useless if you don't know what the file actually is. You'd have to Open With with every app you have until you found one that could open it properly. If we're talking about user convenience, I agree, showing a file's type as part of the filename is very useful. (But IMO a three-letter extension is too limited). There are many other useful conventions, eg, in icon design. These are converging on a common standard. If we're talking about choosing a program to open a file, extenions aren't needed. It would be easy to ensure that Open With offers only programs that can open a given file without reference to an extension. Just standardise metadata (eg, as a series of slots, some which must be filled, others for dev or user options). Easy peasy. Have a good day, Windows is not limited to 8.3. Might not be in Windows 10 (though I think it is), but certainly up through 8 every file had to conform to 8.3 at some level. This is why you would occasionally see a filename like LONGFI~1.DOC instead of "Longfilename.docx" In Windows 7, the introduction of libraries saw the addition (by Microsoft) of .library-ms. Which had the TLE of .lms as I recall. -- "Oh damn", said Maladict. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In message , Wolf K
writes: On 2017-12-14 08:22, Mayayana wrote: "Tim wrote | The type of a file and which app you'd like it to open with are | items | of file metadata and have no business being part of the filename. | Many files have such type-identifiers included. E.g., a JPG file | begins | with JFIF, a WordPerfect file includes WPC in the first line, an MS .doc | Then you've put the metadata inside the file, which is even worse. | | should be part of the file system. This is the problem with mixing Mac and Windows discussions. As I understand it, Mac stores file data separately as a "resource fork". Mac users are not expected to understand anything about files. That's not the same as metadata. [snip reminders about the mess we're dealing with] Well done. Bottom line: it's way past time for standards. There's no reason for different OSs to handle filetype/tagging/etc differently. But: they do. We have to live with it: to pick one, you'd have to antagonise all the others. And (at least if it's Windows - I can't speak for the others) that "one" wouldn't _remain_ consistent anyway. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf "Bother," said Pooh, as Windows crashed into piglet. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | Bottom line: it's way past time for standards. There's no reason for | different OSs to handle filetype/tagging/etc differently. | I wonder if it's too late for that. Or maybe too early. Developments go at such a fast pace, and most of it is now commercial. it's much too late for that. the world is stuck with extensions. Example: I noticed that Bitcoin programming uses a .DAT extension. That's a common extension on Windows for undefined data files. Typically they're custom format, used privately by software. They might contain anything. The Bitcoin people apparently didn't know or didn't care. bitcoin wallets are data, so .dat is appropriate. JPG is a semi-standard only because it compresses well and it's royaslty-free. But it's a terrible image format. The compression degrades the image! all lossy compression formats do. however, the highest quality jpeg is for all intents, indistinguishable from the original. do a difference in photoshop and it's *very* minor. Yet JPG is used to store images in cameras because all computers will recognize it. Meanwhile the JPG header is a mess. It's like a toilet stall in a public bathroom where everyone and his brother have added their 2 cents. nonsense. Any "standards" we have in tech are often partly created by small, well-intentioned groups of insiders who want to improve how things work (often in an atmosphere of seat-of-the-pants urgency). But those groups have their own values and their own priorities. no. So the obvious question becomes: Who is going to be in charge to establish standards and decide on priorities? And what happens to commercial entities that stand to lose? For instance, camera companies that have to remake their hardware/software in order to store some universal format to replace JPG, that everyone agrees on... at least this year. There's rarely standardization in commerical products unless it favors the sellers. It usually doesn't. that's already happening. heif is the new kid on the block. |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | a given file might have only a data fork, only a resource fork or both, | depending on the purpose of the file. | | microsoft copied the idea, adding multiple forks to ntfs, known as | alternate data streams. | Actually MS came up with the ill-fated, bad idea of ADS to help accomodate MS Office to Macs. nope. microsoft copied the mac resource fork concept, extending it to an arbitrary number of forks, versus just two for classic mac os. Later they did some dumb things like using them to store metadata. But whaddayaknow.... it turned out the metadata was lost if the file was moved from an NTFS file system. only if it was moved improperly. there are ways to preserve that data. (Actually that's a handy way to clean ADS. Move them to a FAT32 partition.) only if you don't mind data loss. | You don't need to "open" a file to see what type it is, in | the sense that you don't have to run it. | | but you do have to open the file and read the info in the header, | making it a costly operation just to find out what type of file it is. | There's nothing "costly" about opening a file in a hex editor. HxD uses about 8 MB of RAM. Pale Moon, by contrast, is costing me 100+- MB just to sit there. opening a file is a more costly operation than simply checking its entry in the file system and obtaining the relevant data. put simply: a one-step process versus two-step process. | The hex editor | HxD is free and very good. You can put an Open With HxD | on your right-click menu and look at the file bytes to | see what it is. | | you're going to do that for every single file? I do it when I need to. Not a big deal. We're talking about scenarios where the file type is unknown. I don't find that happens very often. If you don't know what to do with "every single file" then even MacOS handholding won't help. completely missing the point and resorting to your usual ignorant derogatory remarks. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | And, since you like to quibble: is the MIME header part of a post or | not? I would quibble that it is, since it has to be included with the | post so that the client can display the contents properly. | You should know that nospam is a compulsive arguer who regularly carries on bickering matches that go into hundreds of posts. If you answer, he *will* argue. He's also very adept at the appearance of knowledge, using generalities and undefined declarations ("not so", "nonsense", etc) to appear to be discussing a topic expertly. ad hominem. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In article , Wolf K
wrote: [...] The internet works because the necessary data for routing the data packets are inside the data packet, not external. That principle should apply to all forms of data. Including programs, but that's a another issue. mime headers say otherwise. I don't see the relevance of your remark. you mangled the quoting and you don't understand the issues. AIUI, each data packet includes an ID to ensure that the intended recipient computer can snag it from the data stream, and assemble the packets in correct order, including the MIME header at the start of the data. If you want to quibble about whether the ID data is inside the packet or not, go ahead, quibble. Anything to keep you happy. the mime headers are *not* part of the actual data. they *describe* the data that is sent. if that description is incorrect or non-existent, problems occur. for example, a misconfigured web server often serves a binary file as the default text, causing it to display garbled characters in the browser window rather than initiate a file download. forcing a download (option/alt click the link) usually results in a valid file. sometimes the mime headers are wrong. i know of one web site that has several pdf files for download, which when downloaded end up as .exe. renaming them to pdf fixes the problem locally, but the real problem is the mime type on the server is set wrong. the actual data is unaffected. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In article , Wolf K
wrote: | The type of a file and which app you'd like it to open with are | items | of file metadata and have no business being part of the filename. | Many files have such type-identifiers included. E.g., a JPG file begins | with JFIF, a WordPerfect file includes WPC in the first line, an MS | .doc | Then you've put the metadata inside the file, which is even worse. It | should be part of the file system. This is the problem with mixing Mac and Windows discussions. As I understand it, Mac stores file data separately as a "resource fork". No, you have it back to front. File data went in the data fork, metadata went in the resource fork. no it didn't. metadata was kept in the file system. the resource fork (which was optional, as was the data fork) held various resources. it was basically a miniature database. a zero-length file would have an empty data *and* resource fork. rare, but possible. Unfortunately Apple has abandoned this idea and settled for the lowest-common-denominator approach, and w're all the worse off for it. yep. Educate me. pay me and perhaps i will. or, educate yourself. the information in published and has been for several decades. What's the advantage of the "forks"? many, some of which have been mentioned in this very thread. As described, it looks like metadata with a fancy name, apparently conceived as attached to or pointed to by the file. Presumably it's stored separately from the file. read it again, because that's wrong. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In message Mayayana wrote:
"Wolf K" wrote | So the obvious question becomes: Who is going to | be in charge to establish standards and decide on | priorities? | | ISO. I didn't know about that organization. Good idea. | And what happens to commercial entities that | stand to lose? For instance, camera companies that | have to remake their hardware/software in order to | store some universal format to replace JPG, that | everyone agrees on... at least this year. There's rarely | standardization in commercial products unless it | favors the sellers. It usually doesn't. | | Image format is software, not hardware. Yes. That's just an example. The hardware/software will need to work together, no? | All cameras capture the image in | some proprietary RAW format. Amateur cameras immediately process the RAW | image, ending with compression to JPG. Our oldest camera actually | displays "Busy" on the screen while it does this. Some parameters, such | as white balance, can be set by the user. | | The alternative would have to be much larger memory cards, frequent | exchange for fresh ones in the field, and post-processing at home. Yes, but the standard could be changed to PNG, TIF (just a zipped bitmap), or some newer, non-lossy, compressed format, such as an improved non-lossy JPG. It would make sense, but it would require a lot of work for everyone to adapt, from camera makers to software makers to photographers. And since many photographers want metadata in their digital photos, the new standard format would need to accomodate that. HEIF is an excellent format with many modern advantages. No one can force MS to make that public or standardize the structure. Well, that is certainly not true. -- No man is free who is not master of himself |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In message J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Wolf K writes: On 2017-12-14 00:24, Your Name wrote: On 2017-12-14 03:16:11 +0000, Wolf K said: On 2017-12-13 19:37, Your Name wrote: [...] Â* ... you can't rely on the OS to do that since a JPEG image file can actually be opened in a text editor as the file's data, even if it's rarely useful to do so. That's what Open With is for. Open With is near useless if you don't know what the file actually is. You'd have to Open With with every app you have until you found one that could open it properly. If we're talking about user convenience, I agree, showing a file's type as part of the filename is very useful. (But IMO a three-letter extension is too limited). There are many other useful conventions, eg, in icon design. These are converging on a common standard. How about this thought, to add fuel to the fire (stir, stir ...): the filename extension _is_ metadata. Not as intimately bound as metadata _within_ the file (because it _can_ be renamed), but arguably more closely bound than metadata in an attached spoon*. [As another has pointed out, they're not limited to three characters - though I would say three _is_ enough to allow an awful lot of filetypes!] On a strict definition that metadata is data BOUT the data, then yes, file name, size, creation date, path, inode, modifcation date, permissions, access time, ACLs, etc are all metadata. -- So here's us, on the raggedy edge. Don't push me. And I won't push you. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In message , Tim Streater
writes: [] When attachments are emailed, some of the metadata goes with it: at least filename, creation and modification dates. This is all done using the content-disposition: header (see RFC 2183). When I send or receive attachments, I'm pretty sure no date information is included. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf You can be tough without being rude - Nick Clegg, 2014 July |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In article ,
Arthur Wood wrote: The Windows users had no problem changing the name but all the Macintosh users complained they can't change the name and I can't tell them HOW to change the name. It's really important that I get these Macintosh users to hear the file! Use Get Info from Finder. In the Name and Extension panel, type in the name. Unclick Hide extension if shows up. Alternative 1: Open Terminal and use the mv command. Alternative 2: Unmount the filesystem, and mount the volume as a block special device. Seek the sector with the directory, read it, alter it, write out. Close the file and remount the filesystem. -- :- Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @ 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\ I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \ from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
"Lewis" wrote
| HEIF is an excellent format with many modern advantages. | I'm guessing you're saying that because you use Apple and Apple told you so, because Apple is switching to it in iPhones. First, it's a container format, not an image format. Something like docx or like various compound storage formats. Second, the compression used seems to be very good, but is it totally non-lossy? That's not clear from what I've read. Third, and this is a biggie, the compression is patented: https://www.hevcadvance.com/licensin...ng-information Apple is using a system that allows for flexibility like storing different copies of the same image in one container. And presumably they're paying the patent fees. But that's not needed for a basic file format. All that's needed is to develop the best possible compression for bitmaps and then make that format widely supported. Add a clear metadata storage system and it does everything that anyone could want, at least within the range of 24-bit color raster images. But it needs to be a non-patented compression. Otherwise it can't be used by most of the people who would want to use it, like webmasters. | No one can force MS to make that public or standardize the structure. | | Well, that is certainly not true. | No? A company doesn't have a right to keep proprietary technologies secret? Perhaps you'd like to tell us the Coke recipe. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?
In message J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Tim Streater writes: [] When attachments are emailed, some of the metadata goes with it: at least filename, creation and modification dates. This is all done using the content-disposition: header (see RFC 2183). When I send or receive attachments, I'm pretty sure no date information is included. Depends entirely on how you send them. -- Knowledge equals power... --... Power equals energy... People were stupid, sometimes. They thought the Library was a dangerous place because of all the magical books, which was true enough, but what made it really one of the most dangerous places there could ever be was the simple fact that it was a library. Energy equals matter... --... Matter equals mass. And mass distorts space. It distorts it into polyfractal L-Space. --Guards! Guards! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|