Another suggestion.
I can’t find the file extension recommendations written anywhere in the specs.
Despite I’m a fan of embedding XMLs in other XMLs by extending the XML language, I do belive 90% of the usage will still be putting AMF in a file of its own. Therefore, clear indication as to the file extension and MIME types should be written in the final spec?
I propose:
- File Extension:
.AMF.xml - MIME type:
application/xml+amf
The reason why I propose to use a double extension ending with .xml is because, whatever software is installed with your Operating System, you have a chance to properly open up for review/edit the file because:
- for those systems with a AMF-aware app installed (e.g. an color-grading, video-editing, or data-management tool), the app acknowledges the
.AMF.xml“full” extension and you can automatically pick the pipeline by that app via double-clicking on the AMF file. - for whoever does not have a AMF-aware app installed, any application opening XML files would still be associated to AMF, allowing to view and edit it in the corresponding semantic editor, because the final
.xmlextension would still be acknowledged.
Let me know what you think and please note that I’m posting an analogue suggestion in the Common LUF Format draft thread (.CLF.xml file extension in this case).