Re: UTI strings
Re: UTI strings
- Subject: Re: UTI strings
- From: julius <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 30 May 2010 23:15:16 +0100
John hi
On 30 May 2010, at 19:47, John Joyce wrote:
> That's not how these constants work.
> These are intended to be constants that return the correct type for the current build of the system.
> This protects your software from a change in the actual UTI of a common type.
>
I can understand the use of constants to such a purpose.
Hence for instance my ability to write a file as NSRTFTextDocumentType when in the Save panel I have opted to save it as com.apple.rtfd or as a document having no UTI at all.
If I read a document for which I have declared no UTI then the ofType parameter in the readFromData:ofType:error: displays the Name I have used to describe that document type. On the other hand if I have used a UTI then it is the UTI that is passed as the ofType parameter.
So if I have this correctly, in the case of files that will only ever be read by my application it really does not matter what extension or UTI I give them since it is the responsibility of my code to make sense of them. However, if I want to write files that other applications can read I have not only to provide the correct format but also the correct extension or UTI . Is it therefore the case that when writing files to be read by other applications I need not only write using the correct NSDocumentTypeDocumentAttribute but also provide the correct UTI (or extension)? If so then surely I need to have an idea of which UTI's (if any) go with a given NSDocumentTypeDocumentAttribute?
Thanks
Julius
http://juliuspaintings.co.uk
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden