'externalFiles' to 'externalFragments'?

Larry and I were discussing a possible rename yesterday, just sanity checking this with the group. We were specifically noting that we require a naming convention to help distinguish ‘external’ files. The reason is that their only distinguishing
 characteristic within the file is the $scheme property, which is optional (the version property matches a root/parent SARIF file).

 

And so a convention to name these files something like *.external.sarif would be useful. Alternately, of course, we could consider defining an entirely new extension, e.g., external-sarif.

 

When considering either a new extension or a file naming convention, it occurred to me that the use of the term ‘fragment’ would be clearer. And so I have two questions:

 

What would people think about using ‘externalFragments’ as a name rather than ‘externalFiles’? This would be minimally intrusive in the spec and lead to file names such as ‘example.fragment.sarif’,
 which is clearer than ‘example.external.sarif’.

What mechanism should we prefer, a naming convention or a new extension? I,.e., ‘example.fragment.sarif’ or ‘example.fragment-sarif’? or even ‘example.sarif-fragment’ (which is entirely
 readable)

 

Michael