> It's not clear how the app store application would be associated with it or even know about it or how say a terminal would borrow the application that it didn't know about to run it.
Where does the file come from? Suppose you create a file in your terminal application, then it lives inside the terminal and you can use your terminal to run it.
> 2. An actual filesystem allows you to run things that aren't in an app store bundle
Neither a global namespace (file system) nor an appstore are required to execute a program.
> Which app owns the files when An app starts an addon which starts a process which runs an app which accesses a file.
This should be at the discretion of the application developer. This is also the way browsers already work with sandboxed addons.
> This appears to only work for the simpler cases and I'm not even clear what the benefits are supposed to be.
If you don't put everything in the same global namespace, you get more security, cohesion and compatibility.
That's why we use VMs, containers, sandboxes, and various user accounts instead of doing everything in a single filesystem using the root user.
I think constraining many apps access to the file system is a fine idea. I just think think that mapping files to applications very quickly becomes farcical as the abstraction just clearly doesn't match.
It not even optimally secure. Why for example would your image editor need access to all your image files instead of just the ones passed in via a secure system dialog?
In that instance the dialog would be the checkpoint not the some weird file system borrow checker.
Where does the file come from? Suppose you create a file in your terminal application, then it lives inside the terminal and you can use your terminal to run it.
> 2. An actual filesystem allows you to run things that aren't in an app store bundle
Neither a global namespace (file system) nor an appstore are required to execute a program.
> Which app owns the files when An app starts an addon which starts a process which runs an app which accesses a file.
This should be at the discretion of the application developer. This is also the way browsers already work with sandboxed addons.
> This appears to only work for the simpler cases and I'm not even clear what the benefits are supposed to be.
If you don't put everything in the same global namespace, you get more security, cohesion and compatibility. That's why we use VMs, containers, sandboxes, and various user accounts instead of doing everything in a single filesystem using the root user.