I think we should call our CTemplates taglibs "lenses" instead.
Call them what you will. It doesn't change the core issue. If "lenses" allow you access databases, send emails, invoke business methods, etc. you still are inviting JSP/XSP like abuse, albeit, syntacticly not as ugly. It is not what you want to use them for, but what they can be used for and how they are introduced into the system that lead to potential problems.
That said, "lenses" as a name would at least not encourage anyone to abuse the system. In that sense, it is superior to "taglib". Unfortunately, they would be semantically the same.
So here you have my non-voting +1
Using "taglibs" in the implementation of expression languages makes sense until you start with attribute based languages. Using "lenses" in the implementation just sounds weird.
And here you have my non-voting -1
And another bit about the issue of needing user defined java backed taglibs/lenses:
Lenses and views are exactly what I want in order to provide reusability and the building of pages from components. These seem to be micro and mini templates. What is it that you cannot do with a library of jx:macros that causes you to need a full fledged Java object?
Glen Ezkovich -- who has to much time on his hands at the moment. HardBop Consulting glen at hard-bop.com http://www.hard-bop.com
A Proverb for Paranoids:
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers."
- Thomas Pynchon Gravity's Rainbow
