Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!kddlab!cs.titech!wnoc-tyo-news!sranha!srava!erik
From: erik@srava.sra.co.jp (Erik M. van der Poel)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: file attributes
Message-ID: <1792@sranha.sra.co.jp>
Date: 25 Jun 91 07:45:50 GMT
Sender: news@sranha.sra.co.jp
Organization: Software Research Associates, Inc., Japan
Lines: 57
Nntp-Posting-Host: srava

> Where there is no implementation there should never be a standard.

I agree that, in some cases, it is highly desirable to implement
prototypes before attempting to put specs in a draft standard. In
particular, if it's very complex, one should implement it first to
prove that it's feasible.

It seems to me, however, that this is not the case with my metadata
proposal. It is extremely simple, and any IT professional should be
able to see that it is implementable. One possible syntax is a number
of lines (Name: value) followed by an empty line. This is both simple
and extensible. Don't forget that the *system* software does not need
to recognize the names and values. Only user software does. (Access
control lists were mentioned by someone else, not me. We probably want
to put ACLs in an extended inode, under the control of the system for
security purposes.)

Also, in the case of this metadata proposal, it does not make sense
for only a small number of organizations to implement it. A large
number of implementations should exist if it is to be truly useful and
simple for the end-user. Again, migration is covered in my
comp.std.internat article.

Finally, this implement-before-standard approach needs to be used with
considerable care. In the past, many hardware and software
implementors did their own thing, without regard for the end-user, who
must live in a world of heterogeneous systems, and would like to
exchange data with peers. We need industry-wide de facto and de jure
standards that don't obstruct innovation.


> If enough vendors see the value of a feature
> or (equivalently) believe that the market demands that feature, that
> feature becomes a de facto standard.

Exactly. I am currently trying to get the vendors to see the value of
this extension.


# Anyway, making vendors "feel obliged to support it" because of a standard
# is a sure sign you've done a bad job.

I agree with this, actually. I shouldn't have said it the way I did.


: But what scares me about environment variables for files is the
: prospect of the day I see a user type:
: 
: 	grep foo < 'LRECL=80,RECFM=V,DISP=(OLD,KEEP,DELETE),DSN=data'

If metadata is added to Unix files, we will grep this way:

	grep foo data
-
-- 
Erik M. van der Poel                                      erik@sra.co.jp
Software Research Associates, Inc., Tokyo, Japan     TEL +81-3-3234-2692