Feature: Improve the consistency of current presentation of paths to user.

[RokeJulianLockhart]

What's the Problem?

What #9725 (comment) describes.

Solution/Idea

Consequently, similarly to what #8465 (comment) proposes, I suggest that the format of presented paths be different. However, dissimilarly, my proposition affects all paths that this software presents/provides.

I propose:

1. Add option to use forward slash #8465 (comment)

   Replacement of the backward-slash with the forward-slash when paths are presented to the user.

2. Feature: Add support for displaying URI instead of path. #9725 (comment)

   Prepend the necessary components to convert paths to file: Uniform Resource Identifiers to paths when presented to the user.

These suggestions have been combined because the 1st is partially dependent upon the 2nd.

Alternatives

What #9725 (comment) describes.

Priorities

What #9725 (comment) describes.

Files Version

No response

Windows Version

No response

Comments

The forward-slash is represented by HyperText Markup Language code “&#47”, whereas the backward-slash is represented by HyperText Markup Language code “&#92”.

I utilize slash rather than solidus, because https://english.stackexchange.com/a/10996/343952 states that slash is correct for this purpose, despite https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/10993#comment18558_10996 correctly stating that Unicode incorrectly ignores this distinction. I apologize for any consequent confusion.

[Josh65-2201]

Merging with #8465

[RokeJulianLockhart]

#9570 (comment)

@Josh65-2201, #8465 is definitely not identical to this. Please compare them: #8465 barely suggests anything, and what it suggests is entirely different to what I have proposed.

[Josh65-2201]

Both requests suggest using the / instead of . You suggest other areas to use it whilst the other is just for the path. Both have the same end result so this to me is just additions.
Plus the URI stuff is usally for browsers as they by default it searches content on the internet. I've never seen anything else use or have them as a requirement.

[RokeJulianLockhart]

#9570 (comment)

@Josh65-2201, I do not suggest / instead of ., because . references the current path rather than separates it. (Did you mean \?)

Additionally, I do not understand how what you have stated negates the advantages of what I have recommended. If you truly appear to believe that my suggestion is without worth, please explain why.

[Josh65-2201]

Didnt mean . The back slash wasnt shown oddly. Its up to @yaichenbaum but i dont see it using URIs making sence. as for the / beeing use that diccused in the linked issue.

[RokeJulianLockhart]

#9570 (comment)

Understood, @Josh65-2201. Thanks. However, I must say that I would be glad if this were added as a configurable option. Really glad.

[RokeJulianLockhart]

#9570 (comment)

@Josh65-2201, I must mention that what this problem suggests and what you believe to be duplicate suggests are actually different things, too. #8465 (comment) appears to suggest that paths be formatted as /c/Users/ rather than C:/Users, which appears nonsensical to me, because I do not know what would accept such weird and incorrect syntax for paths, whereas what I suggest conforms to all relevant standards, including enterprise UNC and URI paths!

Please reopen this or remove its designation as duplicate, because the problems that my proposition would remediate are utterly dissimilar to what that suggestion would supposedly remediate, and even if my suggestion for support for a URI appears nonsensical, my suggestion for modification of how paths are presented has not been previously proposed, especially by #8465 (comment), and yet is standard practice within much .NET (and consequently PowerShell)-written software when achieving cross-platform support.

[RokeJulianLockhart]

#9570 (comment)

@Josh65-2201, thanks a lot.

[yaira2]

How paths are presented and managed by Files is inconsistent

What's this inconsistent with?

[RokeJulianLockhart]

#9570 (comment)

@yaira2, I phrased that badly by not specifying. I mean that it is inconsistent with most other operating-systems and cross-platform formats (all URIs that I know of, and definitely all URLs) despite Windows supporting this method of separation.