The message 20051125084315.GA32099@areti.co.uk from Chris Green chris@areti.co.uk contains these words:
On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 01:04:21AM +0000, Wayne Stallwood wrote:
Personally I see nothing wrong with this behaviour or the problem in having a desktop folder (on either Windows or Linux)
I think that the whole concept of pretending that a computer's file system maps sensibly onto a 'desktop' and 'folders' is pretty silly. It hides too much of the power of a good computer file system. Why can't we call files 'files' and directories 'directories'?
Personally, I call directories directories. What else can you call a file? [1]
[1] Apart from a document, which would in most cases be more accurate.
I suppose if you were to be really pedantic, a directory would just contain a list of what's present, and amounts to a partition.
A file would be what is normally called a directory. My three-decker basket files on the desktop - that is, on the top of my desk - have in them:
a) A4 paper b) some magazines c) unenclosed printed stuff waiting for attention (usually in vain) d) some folders containing documents e) a small board with some stretched watercolour paper on it f) some computer internals g) a small quantity of dust
My box files on the shelf contain:
a) documents b) envelopes c) glossy photoprint paper and Conqueror laid writing paper d) press cuttings
My disc files contain:
a) 5Œ" floppies b) 3œ" floppies c) zipdiscs d) Linux CDs and DVDs
So, on the box, why call a file a file? It is only one item, which if one is tidy, belongs in a file.