@cdimauro

Quote:

That's another bad design decision of the Amiga developers, because this should have been stored on the OFS (and then provide APIs to query/extract/insert/modify such metadata).

All though that would be cool, it would also be highly impractical and cumbersome - it’s pretty much what old macos had with data fork and resource fork of each and every file - it’s much more practical to have metadata in its own file in parallel. It’s not only workbench that reads .info files - C:Mount reads tooltypes in the .info files of “dos driver� files, and the monitor drivers read their respective tooltypes too. I use my own tooltypes on folders for various metainfo as well, typically accessed from arexx.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote: @cdimauro Quote: That's another bad design decision of the Amiga developers, because this should have been stored on the OFS (and then provide APIs to query/extract/insert/modify such metadata). All though that would be cool, it would also be highly impractical and cumbersome - it’s pretty much what old macos had with data fork and resource fork of each and every file - it’s much more practical to have metadata in its own file in parallel. It’s not only workbench that reads .info files - C:Mount reads tooltypes in the .info files of “dos driver� files, and the monitor drivers read their respective tooltypes too. I use my own tooltypes on folders for various metainfo as well, typically accessed from arexx.

Now tell me more about Amiga's filesystem... comments: where are they stored? Internally (OFS structure) or on a separate file like the icons?

Do you see now why it was another bad design decision?

@cdimauro

Comments are just that, comments - non-critical.
More important comments are more easily kept as tool types, so they don’t vanish when files are copied across file systems, getting altered in the process. This has been common practice with Amiga software since forever.

Last edited by kolla on 19-Jul-2024 at 06:37 AM.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@cdimauro

Quote:

a separate file like the icons

Icons are not stored in a separate file, they are stored in a metadata file.

(Old NewIcons had the option of storing icon in a separate file.)

Last edited by kolla on 19-Jul-2024 at 06:45 AM.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

I think that pretty much all of those things we’ve said here are existential and true but I would have liked to put a virtual wrapper around and amongst the file systems and files and purposes themselves. We already have a myriad of "solutions" on myriad systems, as mentioned here, and some more again... it was my thought that something more fully inclusive would be the Amiga way to deal with it.

Here's a list here of those mentioned:
- File attributes/header (including comment)
- MIME, TLA's, Datatypes
- data and forks
- .info, metadata

Some others are:
- internal file formats (including general standards (like xml, x-html, etc)
- heirarchal file systems / database file systems
- Windows thumb.db
- Windows registry (monster that it is)

I feel that there were also other MS/Windows inventions littering the way, but I can't recall them? If I missed others would you let me know?

I'm organising some old family photos and those that were on MS floppies still have their created date intact whereas those I copied across to my Red Hat 6.2 at the time inherited the copy date as their created date; which was very sad. So for those that I copied at the time and formatted the floppies that information is lost to me and doesn't help in sorting the photos to the degree I would have liked.

I use exiftool to add the date and time to the front of the photos. The Apple iPhone has a photo "date taken" date for photos but a "media created" date for recorded videos. But other pictures sent to you only have the "modified date" being the date and time you received it (for privacy and data size reasons I imagine). And Apple just mixes these all together with each other because we are apparently too stupid to want them in different places. So that was an interesting process to unpick but I have it largely automated now. Funnily, I like the videos and photos together and adding the date and time puts them in the right order thankfully.

This could have been a fertile problem to extend a solution in an Amiga way.

@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote: @cdimauro Comments are just that, comments - non-critical.

Irrelevant. What matters here is that they were metadata AND properly introduced at the filesystem level.
Quote:

More important comments are more easily kept as tool types, so they don’t vanish when files are copied across file systems, getting altered in the process. This has been common practice with Amiga software since forever.

Please, tell me more about Amiga's proper folders/files attributes and how they were copied across (alien) filesystems.

Do you see? Those are other metadata, which cannot be simply copied, exactly like the above comments.
Quote:

kolla wrote: @cdimauro Quote: a separate file like the icons Icons are not stored in a separate file, they are stored in a metadata file.

And now an invented definition. Metadata are defined at the filesystem level!

What you're talking about now is about a trick which was used to circumvent a problem. It also happened with MacOS's metadata, which were copied as hidden files on other alien filesystems (e.g.: FAT/FAT32).

Do you spot the need to stick with proper definitions? How important are (formal) definitions?

In fact, the concept of filesystem and metadata are well defined on the proper (OSes) literature. As anyone could (and should!) have learned on the Operating Systems course at the university.

And we should use the same language to have a proper communication.
Quote:

(Old NewIcons had the option of storing icon in a separate file.)

Again, irrelevant.

@gonegahgah: yes, there's a mess, but some technologies serve (and solve) different problems, as I've written on my previous comment on this topic.

cdimauro wrote:
Quote:

@gonegahgah: yes, there's a mess, but some technologies serve (and solve) different problems, as I've written on my previous comment on this topic.

Cool. I'd like to read it. Is it in this thread or in another one?

Quote:

What you're talking about now is about a trick which was used to circumvent a problem. It also happened with MacOS's metadata, which were copied as hidden files on other alien filesystems (e.g.: FAT/FAT32).

Cool, thank you for that extra description of another solution that was done.
A wrapper for the file systems could have been written in a new fashion to make those more generally available to others besides Apple.

Last edited by gonegahgah on 20-Jul-2024 at 08:08 AM.

@cdimauro

What’s irrelevant here is your opinion - it is what it is, we have what we have - use it or don’t use it. If you wished it to be different, write another article or set up some kickstarter for another "what if� book - this time in Italian.

Menawhile - I keep meta_data_ in the .info files. Comments and protection flags are file system attributes, metadata about the file yes, but not metadata about the content of the file, which needs to be a heck lot more flexible.

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

@gonegahgah

Quote:

A wrapper for the file systems could have been written in a new fashion to make those more generally available to others besides Apple.

What does macOS do today? What does other operating systems do today?

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

Quote:

kolla wrote: What does macOS do today? What does other operating systems do today?

I don't know. What do they do?
I'm pleased I can finally copy photos off my iPhone directly now (though still not voice memos) on my Windows computer using its File Explorer and the menu option "Import Pictures".
That is certainly much nicer. Was that Apple or Microsoft or both?

But it and other things could still be more seamless.
Maybe they are each heading that way for their own systems?

@gonegahgah

Quote:

gonegahgah wrote: cdimauro wrote: Quote: @gonegahgah: yes, there's a mess, but some technologies serve (and solve) different problems, as I've written on my previous comment on this topic. Cool. I'd like to read it. Is it in this thread or in another one?

It was on this thread:
https://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=45270&forum=2&start=20&viewmode=flat&order=0#871492
Quote:

Quote: What you're talking about now is about a trick which was used to circumvent a problem. It also happened with MacOS's metadata, which were copied as hidden files on other alien filesystems (e.g.: FAT/FAT32). Cool, thank you for that extra description of another solution that was done. A wrapper for the file systems could have been written in a new fashion to make those more generally available to others besides Apple.

Yes, those are general tricks which can be implemented depending on the specific needs.

For example, FAT32 introduced some tricks to expand the 8.3 characters to allow much longer (and case-preserving) filenames.

@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote: @cdimauro What’s irrelevant here is your opinion -

I've NOT reported opinions, rather FACTS.
Quote:

it is what it is, we have what we have - use it or don’t use it.

Of course. But that remains a bad design.
Quote:

If you wished it to be different, write another article or set up some kickstarter for another "what if� book - this time in Italian.

You're making confusion with my latest article (which BTW it's not really a what-if, rather it was there to show the non-sense of some work / decisions of Commodore engineers).

In fact, here it's more a matter of FACTS and, specifically, about computer science literature on the operating system areas. Something which you clearly lack, since those are fundamental things which people study on the related course at the university.

Have you got a degree on CS? Have you had the chance to study the above stuff? I don't think so, looking at your writings.
Quote:

Menawhile - I keep meta_data_ in the .info files.

Those aren't metadata, looking at the technical DEFINITION found on the proper literature.

They are (additional) data which are used by the Workbench and a few other programs. So, something at the APPLICATION level and, therefore, NOT at the filesystem level.

Do you spot the difference?
Quote:

Comments and protection flags are file system attributes, metadata about the file yes, but not metadata about the content of the file, which needs to be a heck lot more flexible.

Of course. The content of the file is... the content. You're stating the obivious here.

But everything else = files attributes (of ANY kind) should belong to the metadata domain (e.g. -> stored in the filesystem, like the content, in PROPER, INTERNAL, structures).

To give a proper example and clarify it, filenames and file sizes are file's attributes which are usually stored as metadata. However, they aren't mandatory: there could be filesystems which can miss them (e.g.: you identify the file's by their cluster location on disk, and its size can be fixed).

Basically, the file's content is the only information that is commonly found on any filesystem. Everything else belongs to the metadata, which means (by definition) that it's stored on some internal structure of the filesystem.

Information like icons on Amiga are NOT content NEITHER metadata: they are just usual files which are stored in the filesystem, like any other non .info files.

In fact, you can copy a file and do not copy its icon with the COPY command, to give another example. That's because they are completely detached, independent files. Whereas if they are strictly linked, then you should expect to always work with both of them at the same time (copying, deleting, renaming, ... whatever).

Is it clear now? If not, you can always take some book from the literature and STUDY, since you're completely lacking the foundations on OSes.