ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: Reserved words of XML-Tags in AntBuildFiles
Date Thu, 08 Feb 2001 10:45:44 GMT
At 11:30  8/2/01 +0100, you wrote:
>First I have a general question:
>Are XML-Tags like <project> and <target> reserved words, or may a property
>have the name "project"?
>A fact is:
>Glen and Wolf build the VAJLoad task, wich has, at the moment, a property
>called "project", meaning the VAJinternal projects!
>Here is an XML-Snipped:
>  <!--
>=================================================================== -->
>  <!-- Load Projects into
>          -->
>  <!--
>=================================================================== -->
>  <target name="load" description="load project versions into workspace">
>    <vajload>
>      <project name="GUI Framework*"          version="1.1"/>
>      <project name="Persistance Framework*"  version="1.2"/>
>      <project name="Utilities*"              version="2.5"/>
>    </vajload>
>  </target>
>Ant itself has no problems with this, but Antidote interpretes these
>projects as AntProjects and inserts a new project node for each of these
>properties, because the Antidote-parster isn't context sensitive (a project
>IS a project ;-))! I've asked Simeon if Wolf should rename his property to
>"vajproject" or Antidote should implement contextsensitivity and he told me
>to ask the comunity! This is what I do now ;-).

Personally my opinion is that the parser should be context sensitive ;)

We can/should be able to have alsorts of names for
tasks/sub-elements/attributes/whatever. This is unlikely to be only clash
and I expect other clashes will occur in future. It may be a little more
painful fpor Antidote (at least in Ant1.x) but better worthwhil in long run?



| "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               |

View raw message