DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34398>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34398 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-04-11 18:36 ------- (In reply to comment #8) > IMO, XSD is evil and misguided. That doesn't mean that people arent free to > use > it, but any attempt to retrofit ant to work with XSD is inherently doomed. > It's > just too inflexible, and very hard to mix XSD with dynamic typing/naming of > elements, which is what ant offers (i.e. you cannot determine which set of in my system I use RelaxNG, though I process using NRL so a DTD/XML Schema/RelaxNG...even XSLT templates/functions can be specified to validate...no one schema technology is complete...for example using XML Schema it is very difficult/not possible to define co-constraints...I am not putting forward an arguement to constrain Ant processing to these datatypes. XML schema is not evil, as with many enterprise in scope specifications...its just not applicable to 99% of the problem domain (the same icky feeling with the WS* stack applies here as well). I think we will find that XML Schema primative datatypes will find some level of adoption; there still is a a lot of automation that can be derived from even simple datatypes...we shall see..as I said in any event I am agnostic. I *am* trying to create editor tools which are given enough hints to generate valid markup (across many different processes not just Ant)...I am not proposing that Ant actually consumes/validates against the schema:type attribute > Putting that aside, it may be possible to have a verbose representation of a > task invocation that didnt use XSD or other schema, if that makes it easier > for > machines to work with the language. But then, if you want machine only, why > not > defined an XML representation that can drive Ant directly, and is verbose for > dependencies and other stuff that is implicitly hidden in strings, but which > maps to ant classic. yes, I agree that I can find some middle ground...working on a prototype approach -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
