Subject: bug#76120: This feature is not about "sharing", or a "native" anything.

From: Alvaro Ramirez <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2025 19:08:49 +0000

Visuwesh <[email-masked]> writes:

> [சனி மார்ச் 15, 2025] Visuwesh wrote:
>
>>>> I must sound like a parrot: but could you please consider 
>>>> making
>>>> filenames into file: URLs?  This would avoid the number of
>>>> file-exists-p
>>>> checks, which is a worthy goal IMO.  Remote files could be 
>>>> checked
>>>> with
>>>> (file-remote-p default-directory).
>>>
>>> Could you share more details about file: please?
>>
>> The proposal for file: is mostly so that the backend doesn't 
>> have to
>> second-guess what the item type is.  It could similarly be a 
>> cons cell
>> such as (file . FILENAME).
>
> To clarify this a bit more: I would like the ability to send the
> filename of a file, but not the file itself.  With the current
> file-exists-p check, it would always send the file.

If we go down the file: approach, we have a similar edge case if 
we select a "file:/some/path/to/an/existing/file.txt" region and 
attempt to send the path itself.

The cons or similar approach I mentioned in previous email can be 
part of a richer description language follow-up feature. If we do 
go down this descriptive path, I'd like to avoid defining the 
schema prematurely (ie. in the current patch), and wait until we 
have multiple clear use-cases based on MVP usage/feedback.