Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Andre> Relying on extensions to determine the file type is not very
> Andre> robust. I could e.g. imagine that the mapping extension ->
> Andre> application is not 1:1.
>
> We have some code to guess type by contents already.
>
> Andre> However, from an UI point of view it might even make sense
> ("Do Andre> something sensible"). But I am not sure I like it more
> than an Andre> extra level of menu items....
>
> What we could do is have
>
> - a text field for the file name, with a browse button
>
> - a combox (less clutter that a list like we have now) with the list
> of types (== templates), which is set initially to 'auto' (or
> 'default'). The user can choose to override the template guessed
> by the dialog.
I think that we're getting ahead of ourselves. This is the
UI-equivalent of syntatic sugar. Worse, we're sweetening an interface
that isn't used yet by the vast majority of our users.
Let me finish the all singing, all dancing inset I have been promising
you and then we can discuss this.
--
Angus
