Talk:Sidecar file

[Earlier discussions]

Correction w/re Macintosh OS:

Technically and strictly speaking, in Mac OS X, the resource fork does not exist. Since the release of Mac OS X, Apple has been making a concerted effort to do away with any necessity for the use of the resource fork in data files. As a onetime Mac OS/OS X home user, I have had personal experience with this method of saving data and information to and for files that don't support more conventional methods. The last version of OS X I was using, OS X 10.3.6 (Panther), still had a tendency to permit, arguably too often, the creation of 'resource forks' in their adapted form in the Darwin scheme of things: AppleDouble "dot" files (e.g.: "._Wikipedia-Rocks.mp3") At one point I even undertook to write and promulgate an AppleScript that used the Darwin BASH shell, as well as native AppleScript commands and routines, to bypass the creation of these "dot" files when coying data to non-HFS disks and other media.

I hope this will be further researched at your end and appropriate changes made to the entry.

Have a nice day.

SilversleevesX (talk) 03:26, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is any file that is picked up by an app because the filename matches that of the main file a sidecar? Do subtitles and chapters files count as sidecars? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.162.39.54 (talk) 17:20, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Wikipedia invention?

While the concept is quite universal and every computer platform seem to have their specific term for that, I have never heard of a generic one like this (i.e. sidecar file) before. Has it ever been applied anywhere before Wikipedia? Any evidence? If so, to which technical subcultures was it originally restricted?
– 6birc (talk) 07:00, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not an invention. Speaking of 'sidecar files' is very common in (professional) media and photo production communities. Zuckerberg (talk) 12:06, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]