Re: File systems are semantically impoverished compared to database

Arvind Sankar (arvinds@mit.edu)
Fri, 25 Jun 1999 22:28:21 -0400


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/