Erik Hatcher wrote: >> So you believe that anything can go in the XML tags, no design >> or thinking is needed - because you could translate it with XSL or some >> tools will process it ? > > This is getting a bit exaggerated but I don't feel the syntax of an XML > descriptor is that relevant right now given the other issues on the > table. That's the main point I'm making with this.
For Antlib ( i.e. having the task/types loaded ) - the only remaining issues that I know are the descriptor syntax and format ( and it seems most people want the XML, so the syntax remain the only problem in this space ), and the use of namespaces. For NS - it seems we can do it later. For roles - that's IMO a different problem. >>> But the current one does not support adding other components like >>> conditions, mappers, filters, and selectors. >> >> Does ant support this ? > > No, not currently in a pluggable manner. Isn't that the goal for > antlib? To load collections of ant components ( whatever ant define as component ). Not to define new component types. Are you saying that all those nice filters, selectors, etc can only be used if loaded by antlib ? You can define a task with <taskdef> in a regular ant file - why wouldn't you be able to define the condition without using an antlib ? Costin
