On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 2:59 PM, <johnfa...@gmail.com> wrote: > One nit, but the majority concern I have is in the overall result of > this approach. Seems to me this encourages ad hoc modification of the > spec, leading to inconsistencies and incompatibility between gadgets. > Why not use the existing <Requires>/<Optional> syntax? It's limited, but > typically can get the job done, using a known pattern. >
I agree in principal, however in practice we've seen the need at the implementer level to add extensions in this area. Henning has a patch that implements a stax-based parser that allowed for namespaced extensions. I didn't have time to test and merge that patch so I went ahead and added in the functionality you see. > http://codereview.appspot.com/121064/diff/1/2 > File > java/gadgets/src/main/java/org/apache/shindig/gadgets/spec/ModulePrefs.java > (right): > > http://codereview.appspot.com/121064/diff/1/2#newcode26 > Line 26: import org.w3c.dom.*; > please expand these wildcards, verbose as it may be. > > Silly IDE.. I'll fix it.. > http://codereview.appspot.com/121064 >
