Re: [Docutils-develop] reST extension

[David G. <go...@us...>]

Aahz wrote:
> I've been using .stx as the extension for my structured text files;
> should we adopt that as a standard for reST?

No, I'd rather we didn't.  I've been using plain old .txt, for the same
reason Richard gave, and because all platforms already have a .txt binding
(thus assigning an appropriate icon, and opening an appropriate application
upon double-click).  Include "human beings" in the list of "platforms" and
that's the only reason we need: instant recognition (with a pleasant
surprise hidden within).  In the past, .rtxt, .rst, .rest, and others have
been proposed, but I really don't see the need.  Specifically for .stx,
StructuredText (a la Zope) uses it sometimes, and I'd rather not create any
confusion.

You're free to do what you like for your own files, of course. ;-)

I'll add this to the FAQ (in PEP 287 -- hmm, perhaps it's time for a
separate faq.txt as well?).

-- 
David Goodger  <go...@us...>  Open-source projects:
  - Python Docutils: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/
    (includes reStructuredText: http://docutils.sf.net/rst.html)
  - The Go Tools Project: http://gotools.sourceforge.net/