ml27192@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (10/17/90)
If you are trying to propose a _real_ standard for associating resources, look at Fonts. There, Apple uses the top word for the 'family' ID and the bottom for the individual fonts. There is also the way that DAs get to keep resources, which is similar, though I don't remeber the details. But Apple would never support a text-id convention. Besides, think of all the string-comparisons you would have to do to find your resources. Just being able to compute it is much cleaner.
ldo@waikato.ac.nz (Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Waikato University) (10/19/90)
Hiya, Michael! The BNDL idea sounds good. It also makes it much easier to determine which resources need to be copied when transferring the code to another place. Hmmm, I thought of a potential drawback: if you're adding extension code to an application resource file, would the BNDLs for your extensions cause any possible confusion with the existing BNDL for the application itself? Would the Finder still display the right icons? Now all we need is Apple's blessing, together perhaps with a new "Bundle Manager" to manage the mapping from local to global resource IDs--and perhaps even the bundle copying--in a convenient way... Lawrence D'Oliveiro fone: +64-71-562-889 Computer Services Dept fax: +64-71-384-066 University of Waikato electric mail: ldo@waikato.ac.nz Hamilton, New Zealand 37^ 47' 26" S, 175^ 19' 7" E, GMT+12:00 To someone with a hammer and a screwdriver, every problem looks like a nail with threads.
vd09+@andrew.cmu.edu (Vincent M. Del Vecchio) (10/20/90)
> Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.mac.programmer: 19-Oct-90 Re: New > convention for owne.. Lawrence D'Oliveiro@waik (983) > Hmmm, I thought of a potential drawback: if you're adding extension > code to an application resource file, would the BNDLs for your > extensions cause any possible confusion with the existing BNDL > for the application itself? Would the Finder still display the > right icons? I think we were going to name them "bndl" as opposed to "BNDL" to avoid that problem, but even that might cause confusion. Off the top of my head, may I suggest "ownd" or "OWND"? (Anyone have a better idea?) +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Vincent Del Vecchio \ #include <stddisclaimer.h> | | Box 4834 \ #include <stdquote.h> | | 5125 Margaret Morrison St.\ BITNET: vd09+%andrew@cmuccvma.bitnet | | Pittsburgh, PA 15213 \ UUCP: harvard!andrew.cmu.edu!vd09 | | (412) 268-4441 \ Internet: vd09+@andrew.cmu.edu | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+