>>>>> "SM" == Stefano Mazzocchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
SM> Timo Koepke wrote: >> -perhaps validation of build.xml files SM> You mean creating a DTD/Xschema for Ant? Which would only work for build.xml files that don't use taskdefs. Or the one putting the taskdef into it would be responsible for editing his/her own DTD/Xschema. SM> But I agree that validation is a good thing. Yes, especially since we have to live with rather useless SAXExceptions in case of syntactic errors. While I think full validation is of low priority checking whether buld.xml is at least well formed and providing better error messages would be helpfull. It took me a rather long time to see that the parser shipped with Ant chokes on comments inside elements like <javac ... <!-- deprecation="on" --> /> nsgmls didn't complain at all and I'm not sure who is right here, but the provided parser exception sure didn't help at all. Stefan
