On Wed, 12 Oct 2005, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2005, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>echoXML does property expansion,
>> Could you please introduce a flag in XMLFragement to make this
>> optional?
>
> Could do, but see my comments below:
Steve Loughran wrote:
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
echoXML does property expansion,
Could you please introduce a flag in XMLFragement to make this
optional?
Could do, but see my comments below:
The .NET tasks use XMLFragement for embedded bu
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
echoXML does property expansion,
Could you please introduce a flag in XMLFragement to make this
optional?
Could do, but see my comments below:
The .NET tasks use XMLFragement for embedded build files and I do not
wan
So we now have
* namespace - I'd love to get hold of the prefix
* mixed content - a limitation of our current introspection system
and I've found
* case of attributes - a limitation of our current introspection
system, attributes get turned into all lower
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2003, Christopher Lenz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Any reason why the introspection doesn't look for that interface
directly, instead of XMLFragment?
XMLFragment doesn't implement DocumentFragment, it just builds one.
Ah, I hadn't actually
the namespace URI and the local name.
Only the local name should be passed to DynamicConfigurator.
Naturally, that will make stuff like XMLFragment less useful in 1.6,
because no information about namespaces will be available. To support
such use cases, a new DynamicConfiguratorNS interface shou
nd the local name.
Only the local name should be passed to DynamicConfigurator.
Naturally, that will make stuff like XMLFragment less useful in 1.6, because
no information about namespaces will be available. To support such use
cases, a new DynamicConfiguratorNS interface should be added that would
name?
>
> Actually, I thought so from reading the code,
And they in fact are, at least under some circumstances.
I've changed my task to accept nested build files (and
serialize them to disk) and what I get right
umentFragment object,
exactly.
> Any reason why the introspection doesn't look for that interface
> directly, instead of XMLFragment?
XMLFragment doesn't implement DocumentFragment, it just builds one.
To make your suggestion work, it would be add(DocumentFragment)
instead
Hi Stefan,
sounds cool. Some comments inline:
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
Hi,
I've just added a utility class to CVS HEAD that can be used to turn
nested content into a DOMFragment (not necessarily a tree). I.e., if
you use it as your nested element like
public void addContext(XMLFragment f
On Thu, 2003-11-27 at 12:15, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just added a utility class to CVS HEAD that can be used to turn
> nested content into a DOMFragment (not necessarily a tree). I.e., if
> you use it as your nested element like
>
> public voi
Hi,
I've just added a utility class to CVS HEAD that can be used to turn
nested content into a DOMFragment (not necessarily a tree). I.e., if
you use it as your nested element like
public void addContext(XMLFragment f)
you can get the DOMFragment corresponding to the structure nested
12 matches
Mail list logo