On Wednesday 23 April 2003 17:57, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> Yes, it could be a problem. But running the risk of speaking yet another
> anathema, I'm starting to believe the Jelly approach of using XML
> namespaces is the right one...
+1
Seems simple to implement and fits in with current usage.
Proposal:
* place tasks.properties and typedefs.properties the jar file as
per bugzilla 17844
* have an antlib task that defines a name space for the
tasks/typedefs in the jar. - default is the global namespace.
* use a variation of dynamictag or dynamicelement to
allow the datatypes to be used in supporting tasks / datatypes
> The problem is not so much that one wants to use the same name (say
> containsregex) for two different things (a condition and a filter for
> example), but more than different AntLibs from different people might
> clash. Using a prefix would work, but XML has built-in namespace support,
> and the syntax is not that bad actually, and Ant would remain the default
> namespace.
>
> Plus a single bean could implement both Condition and FileFilter if it
> wanted, so there's no name clash anymore...
It would be nice to have two different classes for this case .....
>
> I'm not sure it's wise the raising the XML namespace issue again at this
> time, if AntLib is to go anywhere though... --DD
True.
Peter.
