> Hey, thanks for this link. It *is* quite interesting; they're definitely
> trying accomplish the same sort of thing that I am. I had hoped to steal
> some of their terminology, but... Reference maybe sort of meaningless
> but it's better than FileObject. :-)
> 
> One thing that is interesting is that they use URIs, with made-up schema
> that map to their filesystem providers. So a Reference to a file in a
> MemoryFilesystem would have a url like
> 
>     ram:/path/to/my/file.
> 
> And files inside zip archives look like:
> 
>     file:///path/to/archive.zip!/path/to/file
> 
> Java folks expect to us URIs everywhere. I wonder how well that would
> work in Smalltalk.
> 
> Colin
> 

Keeping with the theme of URI's, would Resource be a better name?
-------------- next part --------------
Skipped content of type multipart/alternative