Re: standard extension ".plk" for Plucker documents?

2002-05-15 Thread David A. Desrosiers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > So we'd get more accurate Web usage of Plucker if we had a Plucker > extension. "Accurate" how? I think that's the piece I'm missing. d. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.g

Re: standard extension ".plk" for Plucker documents?

2002-05-15 Thread Bill Janssen
> > Web servers, David, not Web browsers. The file extension is often how > > they decide what MIME type to send on the stream. > > Are you referring to the AddType directive of servers such as > Apache? That would pre-suppose that a .plkr document on the server side is > parsed by an inte

Re: standard extension ".plk" for Plucker documents?

2002-05-15 Thread David A. Desrosiers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > > > Unfortunately, when it comes to determining the MIME type of a page to > > > send across the wire, many if not most Web servers are extraordinarily > > > sensitive to the suffixes on file names. > > ..which is a handicap, since they should obe

Re: standard extension ".plk" for Plucker documents?

2002-05-15 Thread Bill Janssen
> I guess it's good to have specific support for this in the browsers, but > for the commoner user, what exactly will he/she see their machine do > with this .plkr file? Presumably, when the UNIX viewer is released, it would pop up to display the document, much as Adobe AcroRead does for PDF docs

Re: standard extension ".plk" for Plucker documents?

2002-05-15 Thread Bill Janssen
> I'd like to amend this to include .plk and .plkr, with .plkr taking > precedence of course, with the .plk for those braindead platforms that can't > natively support 4 characters in an extension (most should now anyway, even > if they ignore the fourth position for operations such as delet

Re: standard extension ".plk" for Plucker documents?

2002-05-14 Thread David A. Desrosiers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > But what good really would it do once that's supported? For us, on Linux/Unix? Nothing.. > I would assume just to upload the file up to the palm, but the hotsync > program itself only supports pdc, pdb, pqa as valid extensions. I

Re: standard extension ".plk" for Plucker documents?

2002-05-14 Thread Adam McDaniel
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 08:43:03PM -0400, David A. Desrosiers wrote: > pilot-link doesn't have anything to do with the MIME type or HTML > gathering process of Plucker, it is only concerned with the final created > .pdb (or .prc/.pqa overall). I would venture to guess that nothing will be >

RE: standard extension ".plk" for Plucker documents?

2002-05-14 Thread David A. Desrosiers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > The Windows Palm stuff requires .prc or .pdb. That is a Palm limitation, you _can not_ install anything on the Palm unless it has an extension of .prc, .pdb, or .pqa, currently, unless you copy it to the external expansion card using anoth

Re: standard extension ".plk" for Plucker documents?

2002-05-14 Thread David A. Desrosiers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 > Folks, I'd like to suggest we start using a standard extension of .plk for > Plucker documents. I'd like to amend this to include .plk and .plkr, with .plkr taking precedence of course, with the .plk for those braindead platforms that can'

RE: standard extension ".plk" for Plucker documents?

2002-05-14 Thread aardvarko
> I could mung the parser a bit to suggest this or add it if no file > extension is specified, or we could just promote the file extension in > documentation. Would it cause any problems with syncing software? I > just use pilot-link, which doesn't seem to care what the extension is, > so I woul