Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Jun 1999 22:28:21 -0400 | From | Arvind Sankar <> | Subject | Re: File systems are semantically impoverished compared to database |
| |
On Fri, Jun 25, 1999 at 10:55:07AM -0400, Lou Grinzo wrote: > You can get the performance today by using directories, but that > destroys usability. Documents need to appear as files to the user,
Why must they appear as files to the user? I don't see quite what is very wrong with having a complex document as a directory.
If they must indeed be files, what kind of structure is supposed to be provided by the OS? It seems that there are very few things that _all_ applications would want to be in there, no? All I can think of is an icon and the mime type of the file. Even the icon would probably be deducible from the mime type. (Storing the name of the executable that is used to open the document is IMHO wrong. There are too many different places that an executable might live, and there are too many different executables that might be used to open a single file type. Eg do you use gimp, xv, or electric eye to open a JPEG file?)
-- arvind
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |