* Mark-Andre Hopf said:
> > A fair point, though I haven't seen a convincing argument why a plain
> > old directory isn't adequate for holding a compound document.
>=20
> (a) Because it prevents the normal user from messing around with the
> internal of the `directory' and with it preventing the application
> programmer from adding tons of code to detect and workaround unexpect=
ed
> changes.
And what about "abnormal" users who want to mess around with it? You're
voting for the lack of flexibility here...
> (b) The normal user expects a `bunch of data' in a single file, not in a
> directory.
> (c) The content of the `directory' isn't of interest to the user but to s=
ome
> applications.
directory <--> application <--> "normal" user
tell me, where does the "normal" user has contact with the directory itself?
He uses the application, so I think you don't make a point here.
marek
--7iMSBzlTiPOCCT2k
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
iQCVAwUBN3okXJ1EuNB7BOoNAQGO2gQAzkUS8lu4abBo32V601JUFeAwf5qhzcgf
FbMfqFEv8p+6/X8RbZslETrPkfBysMasXT72QEluaiF+Ywksg3XBJ+IHxz4VeY+9
Ny9xjQbk05CYEmT15nEmPb7LL0o0j/TuYgknCiGKsWuWQgywNTzyCCrPNHsQqg62
nGkNwzgUJzI=
=nIe2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--7iMSBzlTiPOCCT2k--
-
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/