> From: Jim Fuller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I like the idea that Ant may understand what to do with other
> external namespaces like such as proposed with the html:
> example. And generally agree with how it is proposed how Ant
> deals with namespaces it 'knows' about.
>
I am going to become picky here because I think it is important
to understand the small details in this conversation.
There are several ways to understand what it means for ANT to
"know about" a namespace:
1) ANT knows about any namespace declaration that there is in
your buildfile. This may not seem too interesting.
2) ANT gives a special meaning at namespaces declared using
"antlib:..." URLs. Which it uses to automatically load libraries.
3) ANT knows about tasks and types declared inside some URI
(any URI) using <typedef uri="..."> or <taskdef uri="...">.
Given the above, what do you mean by namespaces "ANT does not know"
about? Given (3) ANT cannot just ignore it, since it may be
a typo of some sort. There is not such a thing as an ignorable
namespace (unless we define a way to tell to ANT to ignore it).
> The main point of my example is that instead of continually
> expanding the Ant schema to accommodate other meta data that
> is non-build specific, to allow non-ant specific namespaced
> elements/attributes (meta
> data) to be allowed inside an ant build document.
>
> Perhaps these namespaces can bind to another java class ( as
> with binding java functions in XSLT ) which ultimately
> determine how they are processed within an Ant
> context...perhaps not.... though I can see this being useful
> in consistently bringing in external scripting languages to
> Ant ( though this is not critical to my argument ).
>
I see two ways here:
1) The already mentioned task Or type
<comment> or better <ignore> in which you may be able to include any
XML you like. And hence keep anotations away boxed-off.
<ant:ignore>
<rdf:x xmlns:rdf="....">...</rdf:x>
</ant:ignore>
2) Alternatively, one could think of using XML processing-instructions
to tell ANT that some particular namespace should be ignored by ANT.
<?ant-ignore uri="...."?>
<rdf:x xmlns:rdf="....">...</rdf:x>
The different approaches may produce quite different functionality,
while
in (1) all foreign URIs segregated appart from the rest of the ANT
lingo, on (2) we could actually intermix them freely:
<?ant-ignore uri="...."?>
<project ... xmlns:rdf="....">
<rdf:x >...</rdf:x>
<target name="xyz" rdf:description="This is my description">
<copy ....>
<rdf:comment>This is a comment inside the code</rdf:comment>
<fileset ..../>
</copy>
</target>
</project>
Which would produce a very powerful intermingling capability,
but it may be too powerful (i.e., too confising for the uninitiated).
(1) should be trivial to do in 1.7, (2) would require changes
in ProjectHelper to implement the processing-instruction.
> A few use cases;
>
> Eventually perhaps there will be a standard method of
> annotating xml documents, I use the RDF/Dublin core
> initiative but perhaps someone would want to use an XHTML
> custom module embedded in Ant <description/> elements.
> There is a real need for versioning Ant xml files
>
Fine.
> Perhaps Ant will be required during the course of a build
> sensitive pieces of information, why not intermix XML
> Encryption / Signature which could be expanded when/if
> securely during the build process ? This could range to
> simple username/passwords to embedding public/private keys etc.... .
>
This I do not buy (yet). Certaintly you can resolve this by having
the sensitive info in an encripted file and having a task
that loads the information during the execution of the build.
You can write the task to use whatever technology you want it to use.
> It's in this way that we can provide a 'dense' xml document
> packed with all the information for a build, at the same time
> leveraging external xml vocabularies instead of cooking their
> own variant every time the need pops up. At some point we
> shall see the boundaries between file-based documents
> blurring with the usage of storing such XML in XML DB
> repositories. XML namespaces will become the true boundary
> between xml vocabularies instead of a physical boundary
> imposed by our current usage of files and directories.
> Perhaps this is something to think about for Ant 2.0.
>
I think an aproach like (2) could give the correct balance
on your direction.
> Cheers, jim
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 22 December 2003 13:53
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: Re: a comment about xml namespace
>
> This is what I (think I) originally proposed, but did
> not articulate it correctly.
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=105240500519029&w=2
>
> Peter
> Jim Fuller wrote:
>
> >Consider the following;
> >
> ><?xml version="1.0"?>
> ><project name="Demonstrate namespace options" default="demo">
> > <RDF:RDF xmlns:RDF="http://www.w3c.org/RDF/";
> >xmlns:DC="http://purl.org/RDF/DC/";>
> > <RDF:Description
> >RDF:HREF="http://purl.org/metadata/dublin_core_elements";
> > DC:Title="namespace build"
> > DC:Creator="Jim Fuller"
> > DC:Subject="xml namespaces"
> > DC:Description="Contains Ant artifacts for building"
> > DC:Publisher="Webcomposite s.r.o."
> > DC:Format="text/html"
> > DC:Type="Technical Report"
> > DC:Language="en"
> > DC:Date="12/22/2003"/>
> > </RDF:RDF>
> >
> > <description>intermixing of namespaces</description>
> >
> > <target name="demo" description="build entry point">
> > <echo message="successful build"/>
> > </target>
> ></project>
> >
> >XML Namespaces was initially created to avoid collision within
> documents
> >that have multiple xml vocabularies.
> >
> >Ant seems to assume by default that all namespaces have
> something to do
> >with build processing...is their any convention planned for
> having Ant
> >ignore specific namespace elements...or more usefully all namespaces
> >that have no Ant processing associated with it ?
> >
> >For instance, the above example maybe generated by a
> sophisticated XML
> >editor that uses Dublin Core and RDF as a method of tracking versions
> of
> >the build.xml file. This is a simple use case, there are other more
> >important use cases involving xml db repositories.
> >
> >Regards, Jim Fuller
> >
> >
> >-------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> -
> >----Jim Fuller Technical Architect WebComposite s.r.o.
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]/http://www.ruminate.co.uk
> >Co-Author ISBN 1861007213 Professional PHP4 XML
> >Co-Author ISBN 1861008074 Professional PHP Web Services Technical
> >Reviewer 'Beginning XSLT', 'Beginning Databases', 'XML Antipatterns'
> >and various other xml / web service books
> >-------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> -
> >----
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
