"François Revol" <revol@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Another problem is when someone manually fixes the attributes > (cause they are wrong, or to add more info), reindexing them would > loose the changes. What about introducing "private" or "internal" attributes: attributes with a bit set to indicate they shouldn't normally be exposed for viewing/editing in the same manner as user-attached attributes? (except determined users who use QuickRes, etc., but they deserve everything they get) I've often wished for a similar thing, because there seems to be quite a divide between how attributes are used. On one hand there are applications that attach all sorts of attributes to files, e.g. last window position, zoom settings, StyledEdit formatting data, etc. But on the other hand, attributes are used by the user for deliberately attaching to files -- and they might be surprised to see countless attributes they don't recognize attached to a file. Maybe simply using binary data types for "internal" attributes would be sufficient to stop careless editing? > The problem is BFS cannot index string attributes larger than 255 > bytes; so this cannot be used for full content indexing. Ouch, as I suspected then... is this a fundamental limit that can't be lifted, even by breaking on-disk compatibility? If it is liftable, I think it should be done -- full-text indexing is the future, and if the user wants that enabled, they should format the drive in the new format. Read+write should be retained for the current version of BFS for those who want to use their existing BeOS partitions (albeit without searching inside files). If it's not, I think that's going to be quite a pain. People differ in how they use search engines, but I've often retrieved things on the Web by searching for certain memorable sentences, and I've seen other people do the same. If this is a common approach (I've really no idea -- I'm just speaking from my experience here, and I hope others give theirs too!) then a keyword indexer would fall well short of expectations. That said, keyword indexing would be better than nothing -- it just doesn't strike me as very future-proof. However it is quite backward-compatible -- I'm using a keyword attribute already for some files, though to be honest I'm usually too lazy to fill it in. An indexer would help immensely with that, but it would need to co-operate with user-edited keywords. For instance, have a "HAIKU:keywords" attribute which is maintained by the indexer, and a user-generated "keywords" attribute which is maintained by the user. Run queries on both attributes, so both indexed attributes and user-added attributes are picked up. Also use an Altavista/Google-style exclusion mechanism, whereby if a keyword is added to the user "keywords" attribute with a "-" at the start, it is ignored in the automatically-indexed list. Thus allowing the user to both add and remove keywords from the OS-generated attribute without actually editing it directly. Just some random thoughts anyway...