On Tue 17 Nov 2015 at 14:05:25 -0500, shawn wilson wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Brian <a...@cityscape.co.uk> wrote: > > On Tue 17 Nov 2015 at 13:08:49 -0500, shawn wilson wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Chris Bannister > >> <cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz> wrote: > >> > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 09:31:53AM -0500, shawn wilson wrote: > >> >> On Nov 16, 2015 5:37 PM, "Lisi Reisz" <lisi.re...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > department has been trying for an hour". Puzzled, because I thought > >> >> > I had > >> >> > sent a .pdf, and had checked that it opened fine in Evince, I looked > >> >> > at > >> >> the > >> >> > file - groaned - and renamed scan-foo to scan-foo.pdf. When resent it > >> >> > >> >> communicated (via its extension). If you create a pdf, it is bad to not > >> >> have the pdf extension - you've lost data. > >> > > >> > How have you lost data? > >> > >> You loose what the file type (data) should be if you save a file w/o > >> an extension. Again, this is fine for an installed program (no one > >> cares as long as it works) but not so good for data that is processed > >> by another program or a script I want to edit. > > > > You would have to give a specific example where a file processed by a > > program or script fails to open for this argument to be convincing, You > > also have to distinguish between data in the file and information the > > extension conveys to the program. > > How about just that vim filetype relies on the filename to determine the > format?
"vim filetype". I don't know what you mean. 'vim /usr/bin/vim' opens the file. I do not understand a word of the display but it does open it. An extension doesn't seem to have a part to play in the file's opening. > I suspect there are other examples where an extension might be > *required* such as compression, but other than Windows, IDK off hand. You haven't yet given an example of any such requirement in Debian.