On 6/8/07, Noam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Let me improve my suggestion, so that it mostly solves James' concern > and can be explained in one sentence: > > --------- > Multiple blocks with the same name would be allowed, as long as all of > them have the same content. > ---------
I'm not sure I like that as it stands. In your example, you provide content for both of the blocks, which clearly violates DRY, since (by virtue of your new rule) they're always going to be identical. If a template designer ever has to update one, they have to update both. I'm still -0 on this, but I might be +0 (yeah, big change) if the rule stated that in order to have multiple blocks with the same name, all must be EMPTY. This would allow a child template to fill in multiple blocks, while not giving template designers a reason to get confused by duplicate content. I'm still not sold on the idea as a whole though, it just seems like any support for it would be quite a mess, whether for the implementation or the users. -Gul --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
