Re: String -> Ressource (was Re: archivefileset resources)

2007-03-23 Thread Dominique Devienne
> --- Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: rule 1 of xml: nobody understands XML namespaces rule 2: anybody who says they do. still doesnt. so there are the following categories -ignorant of xmlns -vaguely aware, but doesnt understand -think they understand, but doesnt really -knows xmlns

Re: String -> Ressource (was Re: archivefileset resources)

2007-03-23 Thread Steve Loughran
Matt Benson wrote: --- Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Maybe. :) But really, I appreciate your input. I have no problem admitting how clueless I am wrt xml in general and ns in particular. :| rule 1 of xml: nobody understands XML namespaces rule 2: anybody who says they do. sti

Re: String -> Ressource (was Re: archivefileset resources)

2007-03-23 Thread Matt Benson
--- Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stefan Bodewig wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Matt Benson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> I think what is needed is a well-known syntax > specification for > >> specifying a string representation of > [resource-type][String to pass > >> to c

Re: String -> Ressource (was Re: archivefileset resources)

2007-03-23 Thread Steve Loughran
Stefan Bodewig wrote: On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think what is needed is a well-known syntax specification for specifying a string representation of [resource-type][String to pass to constructor] e.g. "file?/foo/bar.baz", "url?http://www.apache.org";, "string?

Re: String -> Ressource (was Re: archivefileset resources)

2007-03-23 Thread Matt Benson
--- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Matt Benson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I think what is needed is a well-known syntax > specification for > > specifying a string representation of > [resource-type][String to pass > > to constructor] e.g. "file?/foo/bar

String -> Ressource (was Re: archivefileset resources)

2007-03-22 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think what is needed is a well-known syntax specification for > specifying a string representation of [resource-type][String to pass > to constructor] e.g. "file?/foo/bar.baz", > "url?http://www.apache.org";, "string?blah blah blah".

Re: archivefileset resources

2007-03-22 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Matt Benson >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Surely we can't go there... maybe we'd better rethink the >> > "instanceof FileResource" idiom instead, e.g. >> > is

Re: archivefileset resources

2007-03-22 Thread Matt Benson
whew, I'll try this: :) --- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Matt Benson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> We would want to have a FileRessource remain a > FileRessource even > >> when mapping them - same for th

Re: archivefileset resources

2007-03-21 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> We would want to have a FileRessource remain a FileRessource even >> when mapping them - same for the other subclasses of Ressource. >> Some kind of factory would be needed and using an i

Re: archivefileset resources

2007-03-21 Thread Matt Benson
--- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry for dropping the ball. > Not a problem. To add another metaphor to the conversation, my plate's been so full lately I seem to be dropping various balls... ;) > On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Matt Benson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Stefan Bod

Re: archivefileset resources

2007-03-20 Thread Stefan Bodewig
Sorry for dropping the ball. On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> If you go that route, could you please extract the supporting >> methods into an interface that would allow other implementations to >> return ressources that

Re: archivefileset resources

2007-03-06 Thread Matt Benson
--- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Matt Benson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I noticed that in order to pick the archivefileset > parameters on > > e.g. (I'm assuming zip and family work this > way as well) the > > archivefileset has to be a direct child of

Re: archivefileset resources

2007-03-05 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I noticed that in order to pick the archivefileset parameters on > e.g. (I'm assuming zip and family work this way as well) the > archivefileset has to be a direct child of the archive task. This > means that specifying e.g. > > >

archivefileset resources

2007-03-02 Thread Matt Benson
I noticed that in order to pick the archivefileset parameters on e.g. (I'm assuming zip and family work this way as well) the archivefileset has to be a direct child of the archive task. This means that specifying e.g. doesn't work as I would expect. Is it agreed that 's ignoring the f