Xaml 2009 Features: Built in Types

In Xaml2009, we have built-in support for common CLR types which simplifies authoring. So rather than specifying something like

<s:String xmlns:s=”clr-namespace:System;assembly=mscorlib”> Foo </s:String>

We can use the notation <x:String > Foo </s:String>

The list of types supported is below:















One thing to note is wrt WPF this will work only in loose Xaml. This means that these features cannot be used within Cider\Blend. Rob has a post clarifying the absence of tooling support.

Now you get the slight change in title J

[This is part of a series on New WPF\XAML Features] 


Share this post


Comments (8)

  1. Robert says:

    Dude, WTF… I thought the whole reasoning with using Xml for UI was toolability, and, ironically, the tools are by far the worst part of the WPF experience.

  2. llester says:

    Robert, we understand that this is not ideal. Please read the clarifying postcomments by Rob http://blogs.windowsclient.net/rob_relyea/archive/2009/05/20/yes-xaml2009-isn-t-everywhere-yet.aspx

  3. Daniel Puzey says:

    That’s a strange feature…

    The only reason using <x:string> works like that is because you declare the namespace in a parent tag.  Most xaml files by default will start something like this:

    <Window xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation&quot;


    … which is the only reason the unqualified "x:" namespace will work.

    If you add the "xmlns:s" declaration to your root element, then your unwieldy example becomes no heavier than the new alternative:

    <Window xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation&quot;


    <s:String> Foo </s:String>

    And the tools support that just fine, don’t they?

    I’m not sure what this adds/improves beyond the single missing namespace ref – is there something in the new tags that improves parsing/construction of the objects?  Or is this really just changing an "s" to an "x"?

  4. llester says:

    Daniel, the xaml generated by tools like cider and Blend always have the follows namespaces declared by default (and not just the first one)

           xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation&quot;        xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml&quot;

  5. Daniel Puzey says:

    Sorry Lester, I realise that – I omitted the namespace more for brevity than anything else.

    I think my point is still reasonable, though.  Is there a significant difference between these two (more complete) examples?





       <x:String x:Key="foo">Bar</x:String>








       <s:String x:Key="foo">Bar</s:String>



    I was just wondering if there are any other benefits beyond a single missing namespace reference.

  6. llester says:

    as mentioned, it is an improvement in the authoring experience.

  7. What would have been a real improvement would be the ability to include multiple namespaces in the default namespace. Or some project-wide mappings so I don’t have to junk up every xaml file with the same mappings.

  8. llester says:

    Thats good feedback John. We’ll consider it for future releases.