> First, the proprietary method, not using any special xml > features... the way Ant decided not to go. To demonstrate > using the above example: > <loadtasks assembly="ImageFoo.dll" namespace="ifoo" /> > <loadtasks assembly="NAntFileMagic.dll" namespace="magic" /> > <ifoo:compress-image ... /> > > Pros: > * Concise > * Single definition of namespace > * No confusing uris, with no purpose other than as a name > Cons: > * Not valid xml (undeclared namespace?). Xml validation > errors can be removed by declaring the namespace > (xmlns:ifoo="http://tempuri.org/ifoo";) somewhere in the build > file, but it's annoying to have to.
-1 for this solution (or -<maximum mine votes> if I could give more (less?) than -1 :-) xml validity is _must_ at any case (we will be unable to parse it anyway!) > Second, use namespaces more as they were intended (As I > interpret the intention for xml namespaces). Using the same example: > > <ifoo:compress-image xmlns:ifoo="assembly:ImageFoo.dll" ... />[1] > > Pros: > * Single definition of namespace > * The namespace uri is meaningful > cons: > * The namespace has side-effects, being loading of tasks, > functions etc. Hmm. Dont like this much too... btw: what is BAD about Ant's solution? That second repetition of namespace uri? I dont think that namespaces will be wide spread in all .build files, so I dont see anything more verbose bad here. Martin ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl _______________________________________________ nant-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
