Talk:Filename extension

message: # I heard that AutoDesk has recently claimed a trademark of the .dwg file extension.  Can somebody confirm this and maybe add a section to the article about trademarking file extensions?  Have there been any cases of file extension trademarks that were actually held up in court? The Donc (talk) 01:55, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questions 

message: I think the article needs to be cleaned. Especially the part where it lists the file extensions/formats.
I suggest that the list of file extensions is removed, since there is already a separate page for that.
--
Rather than a separate page, I literally came to you for 2-3 links to some of the top-line File Extension list sites.  I don't know who is making the rules for what is included, but I think of HTML links as a bibliography.  You are citing your sources. Just make sure your sources don't go away.  But the top File Extension HTML sites have been there FOREVER!
The first paragraph is factually incorrect.  I am referring to "... executables, as permissions are used to decide whether a file is executable." The "magic" isn't just a number.  It consists of any unique file header information that is stored in the first part of the file.  On many Linux systems those files are in the /usr/share/file folder.  You can actually look at the magic and magic.mime files to get an idea.  All Unix operating systems first check the magic of the file to determine if a file that is flagged as being executable is in fact really executable.  By that I mean the file may be a valid binary file for some system, but not the one you are on.  If that fails they look for the first string at the start of the file to determine if some scripting program can interpret the script (run it).  Ergo, the end of the first paragraph should be ".. executables.  Unix-like systems use a combination of file permissions where a file is flagged as executable for a user, a group, or the world in conjunction with the "magic" of the file to determine whether a program can be run."  Alternatively you can chop it even farther back in the paragraph as "... where a suffix is not a separate namespace."  Cut the rest.  It just confuses rather than enlightens the reader.  At least now you know why you are cutting it.
hhhobbit 18:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean 

message: Somebody should mention that filename extensions are also used by Mac OS X to identify file types.   (And Apple's in-progress move to Universal Type Identifiers, but I digress.) æle ✆ 2006-03-28t02:30z
:That's Uniform Type Identifiers. Guy Harris 21:57, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  File extensions in Mac OS X 

message: Is the dot part of the extension or not? Softreviewer 19:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "It depends."  In many cases, I'd be inclined to say "no" - a table mapping file extensions to file type strings, applications to use on the file, etc. would probably have the name without the dot as the key.  There's no guarantee of that, though. Guy Harris 02:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you. Softreviewer 17:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the dot part of the extension? 

message: "Mac OS X, however, uses filename suffixes as a consequence of being derived from the Unix-like NEXTSTEP operating system, which did not have extension support in its file system."
Wouldn't the lack of support in its ancestor imply that it would NOT support them as a consequence?  I'm reverting that line to an earlier version.  http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Filename_extension&oldid=53240996
Andy Christ 18:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The person who "Fixed considerable numbers of conflations of "extension" with "suffix"" "fixed" something that wasn't a conflation of extension with suffix; the version you reverted is the correct version. Guy Harris 22:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  contradiction? 

message: Perhaps some information (even a link) should be given about the system as seen in Mac OS 6(?), 7, 8, 9: the system of fourcc-like codes for type and creator (e.x. TEXT for text files, APPL for programs, MACS for system files, etc.). Link to articles: Type code, Creator code, OSType. I'm just not sure where put the details in the article. nneonneo 23:14, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  OS 9 and prior file type system 

message: "A filename extension is a suffix to the name of a computer file applied to indicate the encoding convention (file format) of its contents. In some operating systems (for example Unix) it is optional, while in some others (such as Windows) it is a requirement."
Does this really apply on a modern Windows system? -Rushyo Talk 11:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Opening sentences

message: (Moved from my Talk page, as I think User:Oli Filth wants to discuss the article rather than me personally) --Nigelj (talk) 19:51, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess the issue here is that it has been contested (even if it's by an anonymous IP), and it may be interpreted as some kind of WP:OR.  If it is the case (and some primitive experiments with javac on my part seem to confirm this), then it's probably in some language/tools documentation from Sun.  I'll take a look.  Oli Filth(talk|contribs) 20:14, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well found, Oli.  is much better than the ref I provided. --Nigelj (talk) 14:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  .java and .class 

message: Extension is specifically a special portion of file name represented as a separate field inside filesystems that support extensions (FAT, NTFS), so it is not a simple suffix within the file name. Should be rewritten.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.220.149.228 (talk) 07:18, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect meaning 

message: re:My Page
My Advice:Follow tips below.
-Start by writing a draft
-Then make a jott list
-Proofread and edit
-Rewrite draft for final
-Reread again
74.240.61.242 (talk) 19:54, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  re:My Page 

message: The definition in the introduction states "a suffix seperated from the filename by a dot ….", hence the dot is not considered to be part of the extension. Yet all examples include the dot in the extension. 82.75.155.228 (talk) 14:26, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: After the , in #re:My Page , subsequent header lines are treated as subordinate to it. Is the (ALAR) material spam that can be deleted, or does the markup need to be fixed? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 18:40, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably spam. I deleted it.—J. M. (talk) 21:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  (ALAR) text messes up formatting 

message: Does anybody know whether IBM's use of the low level qualifier (LLQ) in TSO as a file type was inspired by Multics? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 15:11, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of LLQ in TSO? 

message: The article makes the overly broad claim that the extionsion is separated by a period. In CP-67 and VM it is separated by a space. I corrected that once and user:Daniel.Cardenas removed my correction with the comment . I reverted the deletion and added
 a citation, and he reverted it with no explanation. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 23:47, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Your revert cited a different reason: that is what  is for.  Which is a non excuse.  I reverted and explained that wp:cite says uncited sources can be removed at anytime.  If you don't want your edits reverted, then don't use non excuses in your update summary. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 00:14, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  This article should be rewritten from scratch. Thie filename extension looks like a VAX/VMS feature. Its filesystem (Files-11) specifies the "file-type" attribute of up to 38 characters, although most of the default file types have only 3 characters. The file-type must be preceded by a period: node::device:[directory]filename.file-type;version. Since the days of Unix (System V and especially POSIX.1) filenames can contain any character except the directory separator and null character, and there is no explicit filetype extension attribute. --83.137.6.235 (talk) 01:17, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This article describes filename extensions on multiple operating systems.  It speaks of systems where the extension is separate from the name (CTSS, CMS, various DEC operating systems including but not limited to VMS,CP/M, MS-DOS, etc.) and systems where the file name is a string in which "." isn't a special character and, by convention, file names can end with a separator such as a "." followed by an extension (Multics, Unix and Unix-like systems, OS/2 when not using the FAT file system, Windows 9x, Windows NT).  It also discusses the behavior of code above the file system, using the extension to indicate how to process the file.  So, no, it doesn't solely discuss systems where the file name is a string in which "." isn't a special character, but that's not a bug, that's a feature; it does discuss them, just as it discusses systems where the extension is separate from the name. (I.e., this is not an article about UN*X file names, it's an article about file extensions on many different operating systems.) Guy Harris (talk) 03:09, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:NPOV]] The extension is not always separated by a period 

message: I would like to move this page to "file extension". The shorter title is more natural and not ambiguous. It is also the more common name used. Also, delete the redirect at file extension because it has edit history and I cannot move the page myself.
HappyMouse2 (talk) 17:07, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move to File Extension.