[Vorbis] Extension proposal - partly serious

[PrussianSnow]

Arc Riley Wrote:
>
>Leave it alone, with .ogg representing anything in an Ogg container, and
>instead of conforming to some ancient industry standards or some insane
>concept that files should be sorted by CONTENT instead of TYPE.
>
>It's called mime-type for a reason.  Ogg is a type of file.  It contains
>data, whatever that data may be.  Creating different extensions and
>mime-types depending on the content is similar, as I've said before, to
>creating different text file extensions depending on the content of the
>text file;
>
>"Hmm, I want my personal text files to immediately appear different from
>work-related text files, documents about my child's school should be a
>different extension, and so on.  And to make sure that people I send
>these files to understand what they are, this needs to be a standard."
>

Here, here! The extension is for indicating the /type/. The name
preceding the extension is for indicating the /content/. If the extension
indicated the /content/ then we wouldn't need the name at all.

Witness the appearance of '[DivX]' and the like in the /name/ of .AVI
files. If you need to sort with wildcard, etc., nothing is preventing
the user from systematically assigning names to their files.

>
>OggFile is where we are headed, and any application with OggFile support
>will be able to play any form of media.  It thus doesn't care if it's
>audio, video, or something completely different.
>

And if users expect OggFile to be integrated into their OS shell then
it can be integrated into their OS shell. If their OS shell deals with
media files awkwardly and integration is difficult, then all the hard
work that goes into integration will be effort well spent as this will
create even more reason for users to use a OGG based media framework.

Another $0.02,
PrussianSnow