From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dave <dave@dave.tj>
Subject: Re: [9fans] blanks in file names
In-reply-to: <20020710205649.C0B6C19A77@mail.cse.psu.edu> from
 <"arisawa@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp"@Jul>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Message-id: <200207102158.g6ALw3s08063@dave2.dave.tj>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 17:58:02 -0400
Topicbox-Message-UUID: c82ac5e2-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

If I had to vote a priori, blanks would certainly be a no-go for
filenames.  However, the pressure cooker has already burst, and our
chicken is headed straight towards the ceiling.  Getting rid of spaces in
filenames is not much of an option, if we want to be able to get along
in the wide world of non-space-restricted systems.  (One simple way to
realize that s/ /anything/g isn't a very clean option is to note that
different domains are going to require humans to determine how to do the
conversion (and its inverse) and in what contexts to do each of the above.
Maintaining an FTP mirror, for instance, is not going to be easy at all.)
Rethinking our system to fully support blanks, IMHO, is the only way to
keep our chicken from splattering all over the kitchen ;-/

 - Dave


arisawa@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp wrote:
> 
> >Isn't this thread dead yet?
> It seems ...
> So I asked: Is it important?
> So I said: My preference is just s/ /_/g
> So I proposed: uq (unquote)
> Any way, I dislike ' ' in file name.
> 
> Kenji Arisawa
>