At 10:20 2/4/01 +0200, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >Glenn McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> * tasks should have access to its own XML representation. >> >> As Peter said, replace the phrase "XML representation" with "Task >> Object Model", and I'll +1 this. > >And what would this TOM be? > >Tasks already have access to all attributes and all child >elements. Are you talking about a more generic interface to access >them like "Map getAttributes()" or "List getChildern()"? How and under >what circumstances would a task benefit from it?
When it is a container task or a dynamic one like proposed for property. ie <if test="..."> <some-other-task/> </fi> or <property name="foo"> <somedatatype ...> ..... </somedatatype> </property> Cheers, Pete *-----------------------------------------------------* | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, | | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost | | everyone gets busy on the proof." | | - John Kenneth Galbraith | *-----------------------------------------------------*
