RE: ResourceCollections

[Phil Weighill-Smith]

I believe that using an undeclared prefix doesn't make the XML not well-formed 
it makes the XML "invalid" (i.e. a validating parser will barf) [1]. I think 
"well formed" simply means all the right syntax (element and attribute 
declarations are correct, and are all correctly closed/nested).
 
[1] http://java.sun.com/xml/jaxp/dist/1.1/docs/tutorial/glossary.html#wellFormed
 
-Original Message- 
From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Fri 01/04/2005 20:11 
To: Ant Developers List 
Cc: 
Subject: RE: ResourceCollections



> From: Peter Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Matt Benson wrote:
> >I also like the idea of using antlibs, but do we then
> >indicate that the user must explicitly set up the
> >namespace prefixes or do we assign them automagically?
> > If the former, will anybody use them?  If the latter,
> >what prefixes to use?
> >
> The user must explicitly set them up.

Right. NS prefixes are irrelevant really.
The user picks whatever she likes.

And you can't automagically assign them.
Using an undeclared NS prefix makes the XML
document not well-formed, AFAIK. --DD

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: ResourceCollections

[Jesse Glick]

Matt Benson wrote:
Could we
auto-alias the uris so that the user setup might be
like

?
-0.5 for anything which makes the XMLNS rules for Ant scripts more 
complicated (and divergent from the natural interpretation of XMLNS 
semantics) than they already are...

-J.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   x22801   netbeans.org   ant.apache.org
if I had known it was harmless I would have killed it myself
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]