I think I still have a pitchfork in my closet from that one. Personally, I think that we should keep the existing name spaces.. And for those who don't want to use particular elements from those namespaces (for example, with very few exceptions, my mobile flex apps don't use, nor declare the mx namespace), don't have to.
Right now, we have mx (going away, eventually), fx (script tags) and s (spark). I don't even think adding an "a" namespace to denote new components from Apache really makes sense at this point. The reason why mx -> s was important was that the architectural really changed, plus the planned obsolescence of the old components. I don't think there is much on our plate right now that constitutes a similar need (aside some of the architectural changes that Alex and Mike have been teasing us with). -Nick On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > On 3/16/12 9:08 PM, "Omar Gonzalez" <omarg.develo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I think s:List and mx:List is fine. I think changing the classes to > MxList > > or sList or SList is pretty ugly. > In Flex 4, the early pre-releases added Fx to everything (FxList, > FxTextInput) to avoid requiring folks learn about namespaces. The > pre-release users strongly put down the Fx prefix and we used namespaces > instead. I think it was the right decision. > > -- > Alex Harui > Flex SDK Team > Adobe Systems, Inc. > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui > >
