On Wednesday 21 May 2003 08:21, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On Mon, 19 May 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 1) are build script authors allowed to specify arbitary > > URIs for ant type definitions? > > I do not think this is a good idea. > > I've seen that Costin and Conor prefer that antlibs specify their URI > themselves. Could anybody please explain why - and at the same time > please also explain why user choice would be bad here? I feel I must > be missing something.
I do not mind user choice, but I am concerned that allowing arbitary uris will restrict future devl. of ant. Because future interpretation of uris by ant may break build files that use those uris. > > > 2) what should ant do with URIs that it does not recognize? > > > > a) use current method - unknown elements > > 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'm on the fence between a) and b) and wouldn't like either c or d too > much. My code has ProjectHelper2 doing b) (ignoring them) but this could also be done by UnknownElement. Peter.
