[vorbis] Why the commotion about file extensions?

[noprivacy at earthlink.net]

> Programs using the Win16 API never see long extensions, programs using the
> Win32 API cannot depend on short extensions.  The common dialogs (open,
save)

Here's a real example of a modern W9x/Wxp program having problems with legal
filenames...  In fact, it happened to me again today!

PowerArchiver v6.11, which was done in 2001.  It was the last free version
and is still widely used.  I use it in spite of there being newer free
archivers elsewhere.  (Mostly habit.)

Anyway, it ignores any file without a filename but has an extension.  In
other words ".txt" or ".settings" or something.

A leading dot is the way to 'hide' files under Unix (right?) but apparently
Powerarchiver just doesn't see it at all, even though it sees every other
file.

Apparently the lack of a filename confuses it for some reason.

And yes, I've lost files because of that, before I figured out what was
causing it.  (It usually doesn't show up that often because I never do that
leading dots, but some programs do it themselves.)

Admittedly this isn't the same thing as long extensions, but it does show
there are still widely used Windows programs that *still* don't handle
legal, long filenames correctly.  And their failure isn't minor.

To paraphrase the old radio show... "What evil lurks in the hearts of
programs?  Only the Shadow knows!"

> are handled by a system library, and work fine.  I just can't imagine any
> situation where a long extension would cause a program to screw up.

Not every file uses those.  Some do their own custom versions, so they can
do fancier stuff.

> Perhaps someone who uses Windows daily should rename their .ogg files to
> .vorbis and see what problems it causes.  Or we could ask some Flac users
> what problems they've had.  Googling for "'long extension' problems" turns
up
> little.  (As long as it's less than 130 letters.)

You'd also have to test quite a few programs, including players, etc.

<p>> People remember .mp3, .mpg, .avi, .wmv, and .wma because they've been
pounded
> into their brain.  Unfortunately, we don't have the ability to pound
things
> into user's brains, we're not that popular.  I think it would be better

You do have a point there.  Two points, actually.

<p>> People refer to files by their extensions.  People say WAV, not Microsoft
RIFF
> Wave, WMV, not Windows Media Video, and OGG, not Vorbis.  People won't
> remember that .ogt means Ogg Theora, they'll just call it OGT.  With
.theora,
> people would say, "Oh look, a Theora file."

But would they *care* that it's a "Theora" file rather than a "OGT" file?
Does it matter?

People don't care that the mpeg-1 container is different from mpeg-4.  So
why should they care about this?

All they are going to care is "How the expletive do I play this thing?!"

> Also, think of a user looking at a Vorbis file for the first time.
Googling
> for ogg and vorbis bring you to vorbis.com, theora brings you to
theora.org.

They'd probably do the same kind of thing that they've been doing with all
the AVI codecs used in the P2P places... ask in some forum or just download
some big codec pack.

The average casual user who is given the file will try to play it, and
probably give up, without looking for any codec at all.

> If you can't tell by now, I'm a Windows expatriot, and one of the things I
> hate about it is the inelegance forced on it by DOS compatibility.  But
8.3
> filenames are almost dead, and I can't wait to finish the job.

8.3 may be, but TLEs aren't.  And they aren't going away any time soon just
because one or two people dislike them.

<p>> My preference has changed (again!), and I'm thinking Theora+Vorbis files
> should be called .theora, because any video player does audio also.
>
> How about:
>
> .ogg: Ogg Vorbis or Ogg Flac
> .vorbis: Ogg Vorbis
> .flac: Ogg Flac or Flac
> .speex, .theora, etc.: themselves

I think those are all decent.  Except for the fact the extensions are too
long....[grin]

You might want to allow / suggest alternative TLE's, such as .VOR, .SPX,
.THR (or something)

> "flac --explain" recommends that Ogg Flac be called .ogg, so I'm keeping
that.
> The idea is that .ogg is slowly phased out, but until then, it's
associated
> with audio players.  .flac would slowly change from mostly Flac to mostly

I've got no problem with it being associated with audio players, but why
phase it out?

People are already starting to remember it and think of it as audio.
Changing that is going to be like introducing a new format to them.

Although "ogg" is the file container, the reality is that most people think
of "ogg" as *being* audio.  Not Vorbis (which most people have probably
never heard of.)  So why bother phasing it out?  Why not just let that
continue to be the offical audio extension.

<p>> Flac.  Any stream with more than one codec would be named based on which
app
> can handle them all.  (So Theora+Vorbis would be .theora, because it
should
> be played by a video player.)  Also, if people really wanted to, they

That's reasonable.

>could
> truncate the extensions, and they'd still make sense.

Some recommended truncations might be nice...  Otherwise people will just
pick the first three letters.

<p>--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.