Like the "resource fork" on the older MacOS systems? I think that OS/2 also has "extended attributes"(?) which could be set. <quote from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_file_attributes >
In OS/2 <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/2> version 1.2 and later, the High Performance File System <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Performance_File_System> was designed with extended attributes in mind, but support for them was also retro-fitted on the FAT <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_Allocation_Table> filesystem of DOS. For compatibility with other operating systems using a FAT partition, OS/2 attributes are stored inside a single file "EA DATA. SF" located in the root directory. This file is normally inaccessible when an operating system supporting extended attributes manages the disk, but can be freely manipulated under, for example, DOS. Files and directories having extended attributes use one or more clusters <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_(file_system)> inside this file. The logical cluster number of the first used cluster is stored inside the owning file's or directory's directory entry <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAT_extended_file_attributes>. These two bytes are used for other purposes on the FAT32 filesystem, and hence OS/2 extended attributes cannot be stored on this filesystem. Parts of OS/2 version 2.0 and later such as the Workplace Shell <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workplace_Shell> uses several standardized extended attributes (also called *EAs*) for purposes like identifying the filetype, comments, computer icons <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_icon> and keywords about the file. Programs written in the interpreted language Rexx <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rexx> store an already parsed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parse> version of the code as an extended attribute, to allow faster execution. </quote> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Tim Streater <tim at clothears.org.uk> wrote: > On 14 Sep 2015 at 19:29, Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa.com> wrote: > > > On Sep 14, 2015, at 8:38 AM, Stephen Chrzanowski <pontiac76 at gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> There are many extensions of the same .. err.. > >> name(?)...value(?)..structure(?) that are completely different things. > > > > It?s fairly bad in the electronics engineering world, where it seems like > > half the tools use *.sch for schematics and *.brd/pcb for printed circuit > > board layouts, but none of the tools agree on the format of the actual > file > > data. If you have two such apps installed, you have to make a hard > choice > > about which app becomes the default to open such files, and occasionally > have > > to fix it when updating the other app, as it takes over the extensions > again. > > > > This widespread unwillingness to get beyond the 8.3 limits, particularly > on > > Windows, is annoying. We haven?t had to worry about compatibility with > > 3-character file extensions since Windows NT 3.5 and Windows 95, two > decades > > ago now. > > Of course in a sensible world, OS providers would all have implemented a > common metadata API, and no one would need or use extensions. > > -- > Cheers -- Tim > > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users > > -- Schrodinger's backup: The condition of any backup is unknown until a restore is attempted. Yoda of Borg, we are. Futile, resistance is, yes. Assimilated, you will be. He's about as useful as a wax frying pan. 10 to the 12th power microphones = 1 Megaphone Maranatha! <>< John McKown
