A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

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.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #76  
Old December 15th 17, 01:36 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.apps
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,718
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

In article , Your Name
wrote:

Resource Forks are completely unrelated to metadata.

The 2-fork architecture was inherited from Classic Mac OS, and, while
still supported by mac OS X, it is used much less frequently.

In Classic Mac OS, every file consisted of two separate forks (either of
which could be empty).

snip

Wrong.


he's right. you're not.

Purely data files, such as a JPEG image or Word document, did not have
any resource fork at all, not even an empty one. They didn't need one
because there are no resources. That's why if you try to open a data
file in ResEdit it says there is no resource fork and asks if you want
to add one. (An optional add-on did allow ResEdit to open the data
fork).


nope. many times, data files *did* have resource forks for additional
information.

Mainly it was only applications that had resource forks.


not true, although applications usually had little to nothing in the
data fork.

Many people confuse the Finder's information as being part of the
resource fork, but they are different. The Finder's information is not
stored inside the file at all.


that part is true.
Ads
  #77  
Old December 15th 17, 02:06 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.apps,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.system
Lewis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 390
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

In message J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Lewis
writes:
In message Mayayana
wrote:

[]
Second, the compression used seems to be very good, but
is it totally non-lossy? That's not clear from what I've read.


"Lossless images" is the new "vinyl is best" idiocy.

[]
No. "Vinyl is best" is based on (currently) unmeasurable perceptions.


Where "unmeasurable" means "imaginary".

Lossless image compression is, in contrast, a measurable matter:


To a computer? yes. To a human being, no.

--
Come on. Somewhere at the edge of the bell curve is the girl for me.
  #78  
Old December 15th 17, 02:28 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.apps
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

"Lewis" wrote

| And there are many ways (countless ways) to send attachments. Many of
| them are entirely transparent to the user, so without digging they may
| have no idea how they are sent or what metadata is preserved.

You seem to just make things up on the spot. There
are not "many" ways to send attachments in email.
There's a format. All attachments are base64 encoded.
If it's an image it can be inline, in HTML, or sent as
an attachment. That's it.

Any metadata is in the attached file. There's
no metadata sent in the email.


  #79  
Old December 15th 17, 02:31 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.apps,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.system
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

"Lewis" wrote

| "Lossless images" is the new "vinyl is best" idiocy.
|
OK. This is the last post from you that I
read. You say any nonsense that comes into
your head. It's *all* nonsense. At least nospam
tries to be right.



  #80  
Old December 15th 17, 02:45 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.apps
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

"Tim Streater" wrote

| 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.
|
| Then you and / or the person to whom / from whom you send / receive
| attachments are / is using a rubbish email client.
|

You're confusing metadata -- inside the file
header -- with MIME format. Content Disposition
*can* be used to send creation/modification date.
I've never actually seen it done. It's certainly not
required. And sending creation date would make
no sense. Your copy is created when you get it,
just as a file copied across partitions has a creation
date corresponding to when it was copied.

| My email client *does* send such information, and in it I also decode
| such information where present and use it to update the dates for the
| file.

You just said it sends the data. Now you say you
"decode" it. From the file header? That's not
data sent in the email.

I don't get this proud-to-be-ignorant Mac
attitude. Not all Mac people. But it's not something
one never sees among Windows users. People might
not be interested in technical data, but they don't
just make stuff up, pretending to be experts. There
are several people here just delighted to say any
old thing. No wonder you can't agree on how to
open a file.


  #81  
Old December 15th 17, 02:58 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.apps
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,718
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

I don't get this proud-to-be-ignorant Mac
attitude.


that's too bad, since you're *extremely* ignorant about macs and quite
proud of it.

Not all Mac people. But it's not something
one never sees among Windows users.


nonsense. plenty of windows users are incredibly ignorant.

People might
not be interested in technical data, but they don't
just make stuff up, pretending to be experts. There
are several people here just delighted to say any
old thing.


you being one of them.

No wonder you can't agree on how to
open a file.


that being one such example.
  #82  
Old December 15th 17, 07:35 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.apps
Char Jackson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,449
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 17:24:34 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
wrote:

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)


Nope. I can't remember what happened before XP, but at least with XP
through 10 you can create a filename with 200+ characters in the
extension, as long as you don't exceed the total number of characters
allowed.

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"


You're confusing the 'long' filename that humans usually use with the
'short' filename that Windows creates for its own use. There's a little
more to it than that, but not much. For us humans, it's been a very long
time since we were limited to 8.3 filenames.

--

Char Jackson
  #83  
Old December 15th 17, 08:18 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.apps,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.system
Alan Baker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 111
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

On 2017-12-14 7:18 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , Tim Streater
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.


Ummmm... ...no.

Some metadata was COPIED to the desktop database, et al.


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.


  #84  
Old December 15th 17, 09:43 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.apps
Lewis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 390
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

In message Mayayana wrote:
"Lewis" wrote


| And there are many ways (countless ways) to send attachments. Many of
| them are entirely transparent to the user, so without digging they may
| have no idea how they are sent or what metadata is preserved.


You seem to just make things up on the spot. There
are not "many" ways to send attachments in email.


Yes there are.

There's a format. All attachments are base64 encoded.


No, that is not true *at all*.

Any metadata is in the attached file. There's
no metadata sent in the email.


FSVO of metadata. The filnane (and extension) is metadata and is in the
email.

--
The ability to ask question like 'Where am I and who is the "I" that is
asking?' is one of the things that distinguishes mankind from, say,
cuttlefish. --The Last Continent
  #85  
Old December 15th 17, 09:44 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.apps,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.system
Lewis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 390
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

In message Mayayana wrote:
"Lewis" wrote


| "Lossless images" is the new "vinyl is best" idiocy.
|
OK. This is the last post from you that I
read.


Excellent, the willful ignorance arena is all yours.

--
Procrastination is the art of keeping up with yesterday.
  #86  
Old December 15th 17, 09:47 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.apps
Lewis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 390
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

In message Char Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 17:24:34 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
wrote:


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)


Nope. I can't remember what happened before XP, but at least with XP
through 10 you can create a filename with 200+ characters in the
extension, as long as you don't exceed the total number of characters
allowed.


Please reread what I said, that file will have an 8.3 representation in
the filesystem. This was true in XP and in Windows 7 and in Windows 8
(Hmm. now I'm not positive about Windows 8).

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"


You're confusing the 'long' filename that humans usually use with the
'short' filename that Windows creates for its own use.


I'm not confusing them at all, I am pointing out taht both still exist,
and that the 8.3 name is required.

There's a little more to it than that, but not much. For us humans,
it's been a very long time since we were limited to 8.3 filenames.


Again, reading for comprehension is your friend.

"every file had to conform to 8.3 *AT SOME LEVEL*"


--
Someone's behind this. Someone wants to see a war. [...] I've got to
remember that. This isn't a war. This is a crime. --Jingo
  #87  
Old December 15th 17, 10:22 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.apps
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

In message , Char Jackson
writes:
On Thu, 14 Dec 2017 17:24:34 -0000 (UTC), Lewis
wrote:

In message Paul wrote:

[]
Windows is not limited to 8.3.


Might not be in Windows 10 (though I think it is)


Nope. I can't remember what happened before XP, but at least with XP
through 10 you can create a filename with 200+ characters in the
extension, as long as you don't exceed the total number of characters
allowed.


Long filenames came in with '95, I think.

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"


You're confusing the 'long' filename that humans usually use with the
'short' filename that Windows creates for its own use. There's a little
more to it than that, but not much. For us humans, it's been a very long
time since we were limited to 8.3 filenames.

And for the computer. Yes, the 8.3 name _is_ used internally for some
functions. But for the part of the computer that uses the extension to
decide what sort of file it is (e. g. what to open it with), it looks up
the long name. (Strictly it isn't just "long" versus "short"; odd
characters that aren't allowed in 8.3, or a long extension even if the
total is less than 11 - such as a.bcde - is a "long" or at least encoded
name.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Lucy Worsley takes tea in Jane Austen's Regency Bath. - TV "Choices" listing,
RT 2017-5-27
  #88  
Old December 15th 17, 10:29 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.apps
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

In message , Lewis
writes:
In message Mayayana
wrote:
"Lewis" wrote


| And there are many ways (countless ways) to send attachments. Many of
| them are entirely transparent to the user, so without digging they may
| have no idea how they are sent or what metadata is preserved.


You seem to just make things up on the spot. There
are not "many" ways to send attachments in email.


Yes there are.


Indeed. Some of which most modern email/news software doesn't know
about: for example, I can embed an attachment at any point within an
email, and someone else using the same software will see what I sent,
but someone using most other software will see the text I typed before
the attachment, then two attachments - the one I embedded being one, and
the text that came after being the other. [Most modern softwares
_always_ put attachments at the end, perhaps putting a _link_ (often
"cid:") in the body if they want to make it _appear_ that the attachment
isn't at the end.]

There's a format. All attachments are base64 encoded.


No, that is not true *at all*.


UUE was the other common encoding; it used to be the default, on the
basis that you didn't use MIME/base64 unless you knew the recipient
could decode it, but all clients could handle UUE. (Nowadays, most
clients _can't_ handle UUE!)

Any metadata is in the attached file. There's
no metadata sent in the email.


FSVO of metadata. The filnane (and extension) is metadata and is in the
email.

And maybe the size - and sometimes a type indicator. But in the vast
majority of cases, no dates. (Interesting to read from another poster
that there _is_ a mechanism for those to be included, but that he's
never seen it used.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Lucy Worsley takes tea in Jane Austen's Regency Bath. - TV "Choices" listing,
RT 2017-5-27
  #89  
Old December 15th 17, 10:34 AM posted to comp.sys.mac.apps,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.system
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

In message , Lewis
writes:
In message J. P. Gilliver (John)
wrote:
In message , Lewis
writes:
In message Mayayana
wrote:

[]
Second, the compression used seems to be very good, but
is it totally non-lossy? That's not clear from what I've read.

"Lossless images" is the new "vinyl is best" idiocy.

[]
No. "Vinyl is best" is based on (currently) unmeasurable perceptions.


Where "unmeasurable" means "imaginary".


That's my view too, but I try to be a bit more open-minded (or less rude
if you wish).

Lossless image compression is, in contrast, a measurable matter:


To a computer? yes. To a human being, no.

It's _extremely_ visible to me (the corruption of JPEG, I mean) if I
zoom in, especially near edges between areas of large uniform colour.
(Incidentally, GIF is truly lossless once you've got down to 256 colours
or less - ideal for things like logos, and arguably document scans
unless greyscale is being used as a substitute for resolution. Though
for most purposes, I _do_ use JPEG for document scans.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Lucy Worsley takes tea in Jane Austen's Regency Bath. - TV "Choices" listing,
RT 2017-5-27
  #90  
Old December 15th 17, 01:48 PM posted to comp.sys.mac.system,alt.windows7.general,comp.sys.mac.apps
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default Can a Macintosh person tell us how to change the name of a file?

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| You seem to just make things up on the spot. There
| are not "many" ways to send attachments in email.
|
| Yes there are.
|
| Indeed. Some of which most modern email/news software doesn't know
| about: for example, I can embed an attachment at any point within an
| email, and someone else using the same software will see what I sent,
| but someone using most other software will see the text I typed before
| the attachment, then two attachments - the one I embedded being one, and
| the text that came after being the other. [Most modern softwares
| _always_ put attachments at the end, perhaps putting a _link_ (often
| "cid:") in the body if they want to make it _appear_ that the attachment
| isn't at the end.]

You're describing the two versions of the same thing:
Inline and attachment. If the recipient doesn't enable
HTML email then they should see an inline image as an
attachment. Otherwise they'll see it where you put
it in the message. Both are base64-encoded text
sections in the email. There's no difference in that.

As you noted, the "cid:" ID will point to a Content-ID
in another content section to specify the image that
should be rendered. If it's meant to be an attachment
it will have Content-Disposition: attachment. That's all
specified in the MIME standard. I'm not aware of any
other formats in use for email.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIME

Maybe 30 years ago old guys like you and Fred Flinstone
sent uuencoded pictures.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.