Re: [Yaml-core] .yml or .yam?

[Brian I. <in...@tt...>]

On 05/10/02 21:17 -0700, Ned Konz wrote:
> On Saturday 05 October 2002 08:28 pm, you wrote:
> > hm, so i shouldn't care about 8.3? in fact i'm stil contemplating
> > whether to use .html or .htm. i'm planning to distribute .zip files
> > to students/lecturers and they probably use os ranging from win95
> > to winxp. i do still remember the win95 days when my filesystem
> > corrupts and long filenames got truncated into something like
> > ABCDEF~1.TXT or such.
> 
> Actually, it was the DOS apps and 16-bit Windows apps (i.e. not Win32, 
> but Windows 3.1) that did this.
> 
> The Zip format itself supports arbitrary text strings as file names.
> 
> If your users use a 32-bit Zip app like WinZip they should have no 
> problems on Win95 (if I recall correctly).
> 
> The older (DOS) command-line PKZIP may have problems with these 
> filenames.
> 
> But if you're concerned that they may be processing these files with 
> 16-bit apps (maybe some old editor?), I'd use ".yml"

+1

In the past, I've use .yml files. Just simply because the other files in the
system I was working with had 3 char extensions. I would definitely use
'.yml' and not use '.yam'. '.yaml' of course would be the preferred extension
if length is not a concern.

> 
> I see neither .YAM nor .YML files at http://filext.com/y.htm, though 
> this isn't probably an authoritative resource.

Cheers, Brian