OK, thank to all of you. I was just wondering.
Jacques
From: "Joe Eckard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-1
I also use this in all of my projects.
-Joe
On Jun 21, 2008, at 12:50 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
-1
yeah - I just went thru and checked a bunch of my projects - and
we're using this in a number of places. Please leave this in place
- as it IS in use.
Cheers,
Tim
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6595
On Jun 21, 2008, at 10:46 AM, David E Jones wrote:
-1
Unless I'm missing someting... If we deprecate that then it means
the only way to get a decorator is to split up the HTML into
separate FTL files. That may work fine in some cases, but is an
annoying limitation.
I'm also curious about what sort of harm this is causing that makes
it a good candidate for elimination... I haven't seen anyone
mention that yet.
-David
On Jun 21, 2008, at 10:40 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
+1
--- On Sat, 6/21/08, Jacques Le Roux
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Jacques Le Roux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: <html-template-decorator> element
To: [email protected]
Date: Saturday, June 21, 2008, 6:49 AM
I note that in OFBiz the <html-template-decorator>
element is only used once. Its usage is discouraged in
OFBiz, note this comment :
"We don't really want to encourage the use of the
html-template-decorator, should be done on the screen
level. To include the
sections in the decorator template just use the
"render(sectionName)" method "sections"
object, FTL example:
${sections.render("main")}. For more efficient
use the sections.render(sectionName, writer) method should
be used, in FTL this would
be in a transform or something."
So I wonder why it still exists, should we not deprecate it
and later even remove it ? It's weird to me to have an
element that you
discourage usage ...
Jacques
