I hadn't thought about localization. That makes things a bit trickier. Part of my goal was to make methods that allow you to easily access template functionality programmatically. For example:
def lift_surround(template: Box[String], at: Box[String])(child: NodeSeq): NodeSeq def lift_snippet(stype: String)(child: NodeSeq): NodeSeq def lift_embed(what: String): NodeSeq def lift_comet(ctype: String, name: String)(child: NodeSeq): NodeSeq Another goal was to be able to use templates without the rest of Lift. I really just wanted the XML munging (templates, snippets, etc). Didn't think too much about localization, views, etc. In a lot of ways all this stuff is either a NodeSeq or a NodeSeq => NodeSeq. I feel like there's some nice abstraction that would make everything pretty but somehow I'm missing it... My lowest priority would be to make template systems pluggable (i.e., use some other template system with Lift). I have no desire to use this personally, but part of the work involved for the first two goals means extricating Lift's templates from the core of Lift. Making the template system pluggable might just fall out of that. --j On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 3:39 PM, TylerWeir <tyler.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I thought Jorge was talking about this. Maybe he'll jump in. > > On Mar 19, 3:58 pm, David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > It would be very tough because the templating system is all about the > > current state which is all about S and LiftRules. > > > > On Mar 19, 2009 12:41 PM, "Tim Perrett" <timo...@getintheloop.eu> wrote: > > > > Guys, > > > > What would it take to decouple Lifts template system? Specifically, im > > interested in reusing a bunch of the localization and view > > componentry. > > > > I know that wayyyy back there was talk of doing this. For instance, > > lets say that you wanted filesystem view storage, rather than views > > being held in the WAR... right now, you have to rebuild the wheel to > > keep the lift functionality (like selecting templates based on locale > > ISO code) as lift currently only looks for resources based on the > > context root. > > > > Anyway... what are people's thoughts? I appreciate this is a fairly > > big task, but anyone want to bang it out for 1.1? > > > > Cheers, Tim > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
