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
