On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 17:32 -0500, Brian M Dube wrote: > Thorsten Scherler wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 07:17 -0500, Brian M Dube wrote: > >> David Crossley wrote: > >>> I am not yet clear about your main aim. Is it to move > >>> the existing functionality out of the core and leave it > >>> at that (a legacy system)? Or is it to create a framework > >>> as described above which would enable future development > >>> of skins functionality as well as dispatcher. > >> If community support of skins is questionable, then a flexible framework > >> seems to me the way to go. > >> > > > > > > I do not see the need nor the work force to have to different > > skinning/theming frameworks. > > > > I see the dispatcher as successor of skins which should be moved to a > > plugin, but not 2 different frameworks. > > With skins moved to plugin(s) there will still be the choice of > frameworks, but I don't see the need for a parent framework to manage > this choice. You could simply add the required plugins for the rendering > method you want. And this could even be a new method in addition to > skins and dispatcher.
Kind of "Where to put my own (reusabel) theme" approach? > > > > I can help a wee bit but my time is limited ATM since my 2 girls are 3 > > days old. > > Congratulations. > > Brian Cheers. :) salu2 -- Thorsten Scherler thorsten.at.apache.org Open Source Java consulting, training and solutions
