> > > I made a couple of decisions in doing this that will probably generate > some discussion. The major one being the Apache Flex namespace. > > The flex-config.xml file has a new namespace added for Apache Flex: > <namespace> > <uri>http://www.apache.org/flex</uri> > <manifest>apache-manifest.xml</manifest> > </namespace> > > This means you will typical MXML file will start like this if you are > using any of the new (or added in the future) components: > <s:Application > xmlns:fx="http://ns.adobe.com/mxml/2009"; > xmlns:s="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/spark" > xmlns:mx="library://ns.adobe.com/flex/mx" > xmlns:a="http://www.apache.org/flex";> > > Of course you can name the namespace something other than "a" but that > fits with the rest. > > If anyone has any (even minor) issues with what I've done please either go > ahead and change (if you're a committer) or speak up and I'll revert and/or > fix as required. > > Does adding a new apache component namespace paint us into a corner in the future as opposed to using something more abstract (halo, spark, etc.)?
Additionally, why not use the existing spark namespace for new components that are built on the spark architecture and introduce a new component namespace when (and if) a new component architecture is introduced. I could see this being used in a case where a new set of components gets built that leverage GPU acceleration or are dramatically different architectually than spark. If someone wants to add an "mx-ish" component, should that go in the mx namespace or the apache namespace? Or did I completely misunderstand?
