Let's not reinvent the wheel here. The solution for names conflicts is namespaces - not rewriting.
If we use a prefix, let's stick with what everyone else is using. Inventing some "original" solution ( that may or may not be easier or more flexible than the W3C solution ) won't make things better for the user. <antlib location="antcontrib.jar" prefix="myxyz-" /> <myxyx-if ...> is not easier than <project xmlns:myxyz="ant:net.sf.antcontrib" > <myxyz:if ... > Costin Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote: > Hi guys, > > I was away on vacation so hasn't been around to make comments about the > entire discussion. I will try to sumarize here some comments that go > across several messages I have read today. > > The current <antlib> provides a way for the user of a particular antlib to > rename one or more elements that are in conflict with elements of some > other antlib it tries to use. As the renaming is local to the project > there is no problem; it is up to the user of the antlib to decide what > names to use to refer to the loaded things. For example I may use the > <foreach> class of antcontrib but for reasons of my project being in need > to also use a <foreach> defined by some other third party which works > diferently. So I could just load it and rename it lets say to <forall> and > use it in my project using that name. > It is up to me as the user of the antlib. > > From the discussion this last few days I like the idea from (I think) > Peter/Nicola of having short and long names where the long names are form > by adding a prefix defined not by the antlib writer, but by the antlib > user: > > <antlib location="antcontrib.jar" prefix="myxyz-" /> > > which would allowme to use either: > > <if/> or <myxyz-if> > > it is upto the user to decide what to use. Of course the same would be for > the tasks (i.e., <taskdef>) that allows loading individual tasks into > roles. The same rules of collisions and conflict resolution apply. > > The important point is for the user (which is the one who has to > deal with name clashes) to have control of the final naming scheme used in > his/her buildfile. And we are not impossing any wierd semantics or making > assumptions, if I decide to use the same prefix for two antlibs it is up > to me to make sure there are no conflicts. > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: 02 May 2003 14:35 >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: Roles (was: antlib) >> >> >> On Wed, 30 Apr 2003, Jose Alberto Fernandez >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > The problem you are overlooking is the case of <weblogic> element >> > in <ejbjar>, <jspc>, <serverdeploy>, etc. >> >> Maybe not really overlooking but understimating. >> >> The alternative would be to use <weblogicjspc> and <weblogicdeploy> >> for the different interfaces. If they come from different antlibs, we >> really should use XML namespaces to resolve this. >> >> But I now understand that having a table per interface may be >> convenient (though not strictly necessary). >> >> Stefan >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >>
