[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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
> field.
> ftp://pdb.protein.osaka-u.ac.jp/v3/pub/pdb/doc/format_descriptions/format2.3-0108-a4.pdf
> 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.

Regards, Daniel

Reply to: