It has been asserted that RISC OS 4 presents a chance to move to a less problematic form of pathname of the form
ADFS::/path/name/file.real_extension
To someone with UNIX experience, like myself, it would seem the right thing to do.
However can we assume that backwards compatibility is going to be limited? When the StrongARM came out Acorn made great efforts to keep old code going by issuing 3.70 with extra support.
There are many programs out there which rely on the published RISC OS path format. The value of an OS lies in the use you can get from it when running programs. If Acorn changed such a fundamental part of the API many programs would break including all scripts using the form:
set <XXX$Path> <Obey$Dir>.
Unfortunately this one looks like a change not worth making.
However it one were to postulate an alternative path format one more like
method://machine/path/name/in/parts/file.ext
would be my choice to gain wide acceptance.
Time for a new Pathname Style?
Disagree? Then reply!