I honestly don't know what the implications are of changing it. I don't know
if it is like a Copyright, and I honestly don't want to go asking around Adobe
about it right now.
We changed mx and spark because it isn't the same API, it is a
subset/emulation. I don't think we've changed the MXML APIs/spec. But if we
have or if we do someday, then it will make more sense to change it.
I would also wonder how many IDEs are expecting the MXML namespace. Any IDE
should be able to handle other namespaces for third-party libraries, but the
MXML namespace might be special-cased.
I think we have bigger issues to tackle than this for right now, and I think we
could change it later, especially if we do change something about MXML and a
few more years pass and everyone is using newer IDEs that can handle the change.
My 2 cents,
-Alex
On 11/16/18, 2:06 AM, "hferreira" <hferre...@solidsoft.pt> wrote:
My logic is:
1. Apache Royale already changed the namespaces of mx and spark, so there is
not reason to do do the same here;
2. It's seems that it's the last rest of piece of code (one line of code per
mxml) with reference to adobe;
3. We should get rid of adobe, flash, air, swf and swc from the project as
much as possible (not for me believe me and I don't have nothing against
flash/flex, on the
contrary, it's because of the negative around it);
4. For last but not least: 2008 it's old :P for a namespace on a new project
even if the specification didn't changed that could be weird change the
year.
--
Sent from:
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-users.20374.n8.nabble.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5952302404784d33de1f08d64bab2ed1%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636779595924810007&sdata=rSNTseh6f4RhM6Twuej0zuoEkZm4mYDnJJTu%2BDOKta4%3D&reserved=0
