Tyler Thorsted

@ross-spencer ohh, thank you. I have a vague memory of seeing this but only searched for open issues. Do you feel this is the right direction for identification or is...

I also would have interested in seeing consistency between the two versions. I would first want to know how this would affect our enterprise installation of Rosetta and how it...

Running version 6.4. It does seem connected to issue #71. Samples sent to David.

David, I also was able to confirm, by recompressing with zip and naming as OLM, my container signature identifies them correctly. -Tyler On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 3:38 AM...

Here is my initial signature attempt. Yes, I agree, these should be identified as containers. [OLM-Sig.zip](https://github.com/digital-preservation/droid/files/3918050/OLM-Sig.zip)

I have another ZIP Container error. Different message. "Could not process the archival format(ZIP): file:///Flash5.5-S01v5.fla Expected 25 more entries in the Central Directory!" 7ZIP shows a header error when testing....

I should have mentioned, this happens on hundreds of my samples, many directly from the Software Installation CD, from multiple versions. None of which have errors in software when opened.

I could try a simple binary identification method, but not all FLA files have the mimetype file within the structure. I am basing my identification of the DOMDocument.xml as it...

This is worth discussing, and I would add MacBinary, not in PRONOM yet, in the same thought. Some formats should have better identification in these containers as they container the...

In theory, the data fork should be identifiable within a AppleSingle file if a PRONOM signature exists. We would just need to add a container parser for the AppleSingle format....