Re: Moving away from app-centric mimetypes (e.g. kword)

Dave Leigh schrieb:
> 
> On Sunday 12 May 2002 09:01, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > Please help me out with an idea that came in my mind a few weeks ago.
> >
> > I browsed a directory where there were a dozen files all in the format
> > of a well known/disliked word processor. They all were presented as of
> > the same mime type. But this didn't represent their real state being:
> > - letters
> > - papers
> > - brain drops
> > etc.
> >
> > But I couldn't always guess it from the files' names what kind of
> > document they were. So it flashed through my brain:
> >
> > There has to be more refinement in the representation and handling of
> > document files in a file manager!
> 
> For some filetypes there are ways of doing this by direct examination of the
> file. As you noted, with koffice documents you can examine the XML. The same
> is true of OpenOffice files. You can examine a LyX or LaTeX file to discover
> the template. Though the format is closed, similar document info is stored in
> MSOffice files.
> 
> I'm a little concerned that you're suggesting further categorization using
> the MIMEtype itself. Do we really need to suggest adding hundreds of
> variations to these, since it would have a serious adverse effect on multiple
> platforms and absolutely require a standards committee?  And especially since
> it involves user-defined and arbitrary categories ("brain drops" comes to
> mind). After all, the MIMEtype is intended to describe a file that's
> transmitted (it's a "mail extension") so the receiving machine knows what to
> do with it. No matter how you further categorize the file, the same apps are
> used to handle it. Which means it's not useful for file associations. AND it

I don't agree fully. The MIMEtype only describes the format, and I might
treat
files with the same format with different applications only because of
the content.
Example? Uhm... there must be a reason I use both Abiword and KWord for
MS.doc-files.

Yes, there would be the need of a standard but even user-defined ones
would work if you make sure those who receive it know it too.

Do you have an application/x-fea mimetype? I have :) The related
application is simply only a internal used one.

> requires that you now associate specific MIMEtypes with specific files (which
> isn't currently done). So now you've got new problems. Where would you store
> it locally? Would this require a change to the filesystem? Or a yet another
> hidden directory? Besides, I might categorize the same files differently.

You are right. There is the need for an extension. But that should not
stop us, shouldn't it? :)

> Nah, I think you should leave the MIMEtypes alone. Better ways to do what
> you're suggesting might involve an improved file preview on the part of KDE,
> and for selected filetypes I wouldn't mind seeing the document properties
> displayed on mouseover. File previews are getting better all the time.

But this helps only with visual interacting...
 
> ...but let's face it, the "problem" you've discovered isn't much of a
> problem. It's most easily fixed with better directory organization and file
> naming conventions on your own part. Especially better naming. Then you can
> send it to a different platform without loss of information.

Well the directory I mentioned above wasn't mine ;) (My directories are
organized in a grade I doubt somebody can do better :). And it is not
the first time I work with people who have a some strange concept of
order. As you never will change people I thought about changing my
tools. 

But I even myself don't create a directory for a single file so there
are dirs with eight to ten files all in the same word processor format.
Problem is that when in need for one of the files you, alright, I only
remember it was in that directory and a letter. But I first have to read
all the file names before I decide which to open for a first try. If
there are dedicated mimetypes or whatever I would only have to look at
those with the specific symbol. 

Imagine to find a "Makefile" in a dir crowded with source files. You'll
find it quickly as it has it's own mimetype...

Friedrich