> Yes, it is. You don't even try to pretend otherwise, the format isn't delivering new semantics here. The existence of the extra formats that caused Datatypes to be created is an artefact of history, like TIFF, and best left there.
The formats exist and are being used, and new ones keep being created. That is the problem. You can keep pretending we don't need to deal with them. Maybe you don't, but I do have to deal with format conversion on a daily basis, as I don't live in a fantasy world where everyone chooses to use the formats I would prefer.
> "Having the computer do it" for every format in every program incurs an unending maintenance and security burden for all systems across all time, whereas lift-and-shift averts that.
Having the computer do it for every format in every program in terms of the actual conversion is exactly what we have today because of the lack of use of things like datatypes. On top of that we have piles of conversion tools to deal with moving data between programs that don't implement the same set of formats.
What we're lacking is automation and deduplication of effort.
There's no added security concern here to automating the execution of code we already execute.
If anything avoiding crappy reimplementation of formats all over the place would be a substantial reduction in complexity and make it easier to actually put in the effort to produce something more robust.
Meanwhile what you're engaged in is meaningless sophistry given that your proposed solution of just getting rid of these formats is not an option available to us.
> And yet I suppose that today you will continue as before, blaming others for things you choose, and perhaps lamenting that whichever bunch of crooks currently own "Amiga" aren't shovelling more money into the pit.
I don't care who currently own Amiga. It's entirely irrelevant to this conversation.
But your non-solution does not become any more of a solution whether or not I get the time to do something about my workflows.
The formats exist and are being used, and new ones keep being created. That is the problem. You can keep pretending we don't need to deal with them. Maybe you don't, but I do have to deal with format conversion on a daily basis, as I don't live in a fantasy world where everyone chooses to use the formats I would prefer.
> "Having the computer do it" for every format in every program incurs an unending maintenance and security burden for all systems across all time, whereas lift-and-shift averts that.
Having the computer do it for every format in every program in terms of the actual conversion is exactly what we have today because of the lack of use of things like datatypes. On top of that we have piles of conversion tools to deal with moving data between programs that don't implement the same set of formats.
What we're lacking is automation and deduplication of effort.
There's no added security concern here to automating the execution of code we already execute.
If anything avoiding crappy reimplementation of formats all over the place would be a substantial reduction in complexity and make it easier to actually put in the effort to produce something more robust.
Meanwhile what you're engaged in is meaningless sophistry given that your proposed solution of just getting rid of these formats is not an option available to us.
> And yet I suppose that today you will continue as before, blaming others for things you choose, and perhaps lamenting that whichever bunch of crooks currently own "Amiga" aren't shovelling more money into the pit.
I don't care who currently own Amiga. It's entirely irrelevant to this conversation.
But your non-solution does not become any more of a solution whether or not I get the time to do something about my workflows.