Seeing as this rather trivial, let's add some controversy to make it more interesting. We're Engineers right? They are monkeys. Who cares if they feel good or not? Seriously, don't care. LoLz
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 4:44 PM, Lenny Primak <[email protected]>wrote: > This I just a reminder for the dev folks how important designer fidelity > is. > Most Devs including me sometimes forget that. > > On Dec 13, 2012, at 5:23 PM, "Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo" < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 19:40:52 -0200, Lenny Primak <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> That does not solve the problem of editing the templates in DreamWeaver > >> and seeing the changes right away, without Tapestry, database, etc. > >> When I give my templates to the designer, they will just run DW on it, > >> that's all. It is very important to be able to keep the DW-friendly > syntax n Tapestry. Thats #1 feature in Tapestry for me. No other framework > does this as well now. > > > > I know what you're talking, I also work with designers (not in person) > and I agree that previewability is awesome. I just don't understand your > concern here. Besides simple form field components, all others generate > HTML beyond its declaration and wouldn't be 100% previewable anyway (Grid, > BeanEditor, etc). In addition, the proposed mixin, as any other mixin, is > optional. If you want to keep the template as closer to the generated HTML, > all you need to do is not to use it. In other words, do nothing. > > > > -- > > Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
