From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 08:50:09 +0000
From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net>
Message-ID: <9KmdnbmiCYZVcVHbnZ2dnUVZ_uGknZ2d@comcast.com>
References: <198ff93d3223123a0e103cbcc4755bc4@quanstro.net>,
	<sJOdnTJQRfxcjlTbnZ2dnUVZ_sKqnZ2d@comcast.com>,
	<1187630509.315942.311670@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
Subject: [9fans] Re: everything is a directory
Topicbox-Message-UUID: b03e6da0-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

"jsnx" <jason.dusek@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1187630509.315942.311670@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> Putting attributes in the same namespace as files introduces a whole
> new problem -- just as storing ownership in foo/.owners would.

I don't see why.  Attributes have to be attached to a specific file,
so why not attach them "in the usual way" rather than inventing a
new mechanism?  If .owners was enforced by the OS then why
couldn't it be attached in the usual namespace?