Re: Launch Services Issue/Question - two apps using same file extensions
Re: Launch Services Issue/Question - two apps using same file extensions
- Subject: Re: Launch Services Issue/Question - two apps using same file extensions
- From: Christiaan Hofman <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2013 00:16:57 +0200
On Jul 5, 2013, at 23:22, Stephen Kay wrote:
> on 7/4/13 11:05 PM, Quincey Morris at email@hidden
> wrote:
>
>> It's not a Launch Services issue, because Launch Services isn't designed to
>> support this scenario (distinguishing between types on something other than
>> extension, when an extension is specified).
>
> Thanks for the detailed reply. I had a feeling that was the case.
>
>> What is the behavior you're looking to implement here? According to your
>> description, if the user has only one of the apps installed, documents from
>> both apps will be opened by the installed app, and the documents will all have
>> the icon of the installed app. Is that what you want, or do you want document
>> created somewhere else by the not-installed app to have their original icon?
>
> If the user more than one app flavor installed, the behavior I would like is
> that each app's .kdf file has the correct icon and is opened by the correct
> app. Even though they have the same extension.
>
>
>> If both apps are installed, you seem to be implying, the documents should be
>> opened by their originating app. If so, the document types really are
>> different, and so should have a different, distinguishing extension. (Don't
>> follow the creator ID fantasy. Creator IDs are deprecated, so they don't lead
>> you anywhere good in the future.)
>>
>> I would be inclined to suggest that you define 3 UTIs in the app bundle for
>> each app:
>>
>> com.you.music-keyboard
>> com.you.music-keyboard-a
>> com.you.music-keyboard-b
>
> [snip...]
>
> I have 7 different flavors of the app. I really don't want to make 7
> different file extensions for what is essentially the same data file format.
> Right now the apps can try to open each other's kdf files, and in some cases
> it is allowed and in some cases it is not - this is handled internally by
> the app. Changing to what you've outlined here, while it sounds like it
> would work, would be a ton of work.... And then all of the documentation for
> the different flavors would have to be changed to describe different file
> extensions... etc.
>
> So I guess I just have to live with it. There's not that many users who have
> more than one flavor installed, and if you do, then you may have to manually
> change which app opens a particular file, I guess.
>
> As someone else from this list sent me privately:
>
>> A couple of years ago some idiot in Apple management decided that the Finder
>> should completely ignore creator ids, and there is nothing you can do about
>> this.
>
> It's a shame that there used to be a perfectly workable method for doing
> this that no longer works, with no real replacement.
>
> - Stephen
There is. Different UTIs based on different extensions. I don't see why having different extensions is not OK, while different creator codes is OK. It's really not anything fundamentally different, just putting the information in a different place. The fact that you have 7 different incompatible formats means you have 7 different incompatible file types. So why would it not be OK to advertise that fact and indicate it in the file extension?
Christiaan
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden