On 16 Jan 2001, David N. Welton wrote:
> [ Does this mean I'm back on line? No, unfortunately. The company
> that was supposed to be opening an office here in Padova has been slow
> about it. I'm writing from a friends house, but hope to be back on
> line soonest. If anyone wants to sponsor my work on mod_dtcl, offers
> are welcome: +39.348.8866859 :-) ]
We hope you'll be online soon too - I suppose ;-)
> > With mod_dtcl at its current 0.8 level isn't it close enough to "day
> > 1" for fundamental conventions to be switched if it makes sense?
>
> Yes, if it's a good thing, I'm willing to break backwards
> compatiblity. Keep in mind that some people have been using mod_dtcl
> for a while though. Posting a simple script that seeks and changes
> .ttml files from <+ +> to <?dtcl ?> would probably be appreciated if
> we do make this change.
Why not using both <+ and <?dtcl ? This will be backwards compatible ...
I don't plan on jumping through all the servers I installed dtcl on ...
Besides it's always better to leave this on, at least for some time.
> > Consistency (and deference to XML) surely is in the best interest of
> > everyone, agreed?
>
> I don't want to use 'tcl' though... I don't think it's quite fair to
> grab that whole name for mod_dtcl. Otherwise, what might other
> parsers use?
Then use <?dtcl ... and <SCRIPT LANGUAGE="dtcl"> - it may seem a bit weird
as the language actually is tcl, but the 'dialect' is dtcl...
Wojciech Kocjan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
