ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Costin Manolache <cmanola...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: antlib / proposal of Peter Reilly
Date Tue, 20 May 2003 07:34:36 GMT
peter reilly wrote:


> There are a number of issues here.
> 
> 1) are build script authors allowed to specify arbitary
>     URIs for ant type definitions?
>     I do not think this is a good idea.

I agree - I also preffer URIs that are interpreted in a certain way (
package names ), however we could support both. 

A URI that starts with "antlib:" will be parsed and the package used.
Other URIs will be treated in a different way - either as arbitrary strings
and matched against an explicit definition ( like the xml catalog ), or 
we may discover better things in future. 


> 2) what should ant do with URIs that it does not recognize?
> 
>     a) use current method - unknown elements

That seems the most reasonable and safe - it is what it does with unknown
elements ( in no-namespace case ), I don't see why it should be different.


>     b) ignore them
>     c) explicty say that the ns uri is not supported
>     d) convert them to Text in task/typedefs (the suggestion below)
> 
>     I would prefer b) as it allows other processing of the xml content -
>     say in an xml processing pipeline.  d) is also nice.



> 3) Should all processing outside Project/Target be done by
> PH2#ElementHandler?
>     I think one should be able to plug in handlers for different URIs, or
>     URI patterns. My UnknownUriHandler is an (possibly not very good)
>     example.

My preference would be to not put any more functionality in ProjectHelper2,
but operate on the tree. PH2 should just create the tree.


Costin



Mime
View raw message