Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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>
I still don't get it, sorry. Somehow If.createTask("some-other-task")
or similar would have been called anyway, wouldn't it?
Stefan
