if you could pick a standard format for a purpose what would it be and why?

e.g. flac for lossless audio because…

(yes you can add new categories)

summary:

  1. photos .jxl
  2. open domain image data .exr
  3. videos .av1
  4. lossless audio .flac
  5. lossy audio .opus
  6. subtitles srt/ass
  7. fonts .otf
  8. container mkv (doesnt contain .jxl)
  9. plain text utf-8 (many also say markup but disagree on the implementation)
  10. documents .odt
  11. archive files (this one is causing a bloodbath so i picked randomly) .tar.zst
  12. configuration files toml
  13. typesetting typst
  14. interchange format .ora
  15. models .gltf / .glb
  16. daw session files .dawproject
  17. otdr measurement results .xml
  • kadu@lemmy.world
    14·
    1 year ago

    it’s an xz containing a tar

    So what? When you zip 5 documents together do you name it .zip or .config.lib.sh.deb.zip?

    No, you expect it to be a file.exe.zip

    Double extensions are not conventional on Windows, so no, I do not.

    • 7eter@feddit.de
      3·
      1 year ago

      Dots in filenames are commonly used in any operating system like name_version.2.4.5.exe or similar… So I don’t see a problem.

        • 7eter@feddit.de
          1·
          1 year ago

          Hiding part of a file name might be the real problem. A IMG.jpg.exe - would result in a harmless looking JPG, but it isn’t.

          • kadu@lemmy.world
            1·
            1 year ago

            A IMG.jpg.exe - would result in a harmless looking JPG, but it isn’t.

            True. Which is why getting people used to seeing .extension.extension2 is a terrible convention. Call a .zip a .zip, not a .exe.zip.

            • 7eter@feddit.de
              1·
              1 year ago

              which will not stop a bad guy form doing so. Therefore dont hide part of a filename and get people used to seeing tar.gz