Re: MIME type for PDB files.
Am Dienstag, den 15.01.2008, 13:43 +0900 schrieb Charles Plessy:
> Le Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 11:20:09AM -0000, Debian Wiki a écrit :
> > The following page has been changed by SteffenMoeller:
> > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMedMIME
> > + Can someone confirm/improve
> > +
> > + ||'''Suffix'''||'''MIME type''' ||'''Package(s)''' ||
> > + ||.pdb ||chemical/x-pdb || rasmol ||
> Hi Steffen,
> as per .pdb format version 2.3, all records must start with a HEADER
> page 13.
> The chemical-mime-data package provides a mime entry for the PDB format
> that seems to be very comprehensive as it also takes into account broken
> files that start with other fields.
> I have no experience in cristallography. Daniel, do you know if this is
> necessary ?
What should be necessary?
> Maybe rasmol (and pymol, and others) should suggest chemical-mime-data?
> I do not think that it can recommend it because of bug 420795.
I don't think, that bug #420795 is a reason to not recommend
chemical-mime-data. Unfortunately chemical/* is not registered, but
widely used. So we have to live with the warnings (and at least I can
live with them). You will receive exactly the same warnings by adding
chemical/* MIME types to "your" packages. So what? I would suggest or
recommend chemical-mime-data. It also contains (as of version 0.1.95
IIRC) detection routines for KDE3 and libmagic/mod_mime_magic.
> Shall I
> file wishlist bugs or should we try to push a text/x-pdb alternative in
> shared-mime-database ?
That is a really bad alternative. (a) You would create a conflict with
chemical/x-pdb for exactly the same file format and thus
shared-mime-info would need to conflict with chemical-mime-data. (b)
Most servers I know send .pdb files as chemical/x-pdb and not text/x-pdb
(note, that chemical/x-pdb belongs to the original RFC by Rzepa,
Murray-Rust and Whitaker more then 10 years ago). This will also be the
case for users using chemical-mime-data: detection routines will detect
attachments to be of type chemical/x-pdb when sending an eMail.
No, here I really recommend to stay with the historic name. I told you
to not *create* new chemical/* MIME types (exception may be possible for
"real" chemical file types, that are not application specific), not to
rename existing ones. The latter will only create more confusion.