I actually haven't tried HAML and SASS yet either -- the reason I linked to the SassFilter was that it's an example of an extension that implements a filter. I may not be understanding your use-case correctly, but who or what is producing this XML? And why could they/it just use standard HTML tables?
I guess no matter what you could use either the filter or radius tag solution depending on what fits your situation best. -Andrew On 7/5/07, dave4c03 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks, there is no doubt in my mind that Haml is impressive! If I was > the > only person involved I suspect that I would prefer that route. > > However, I have to deal with people who only talk html and css. Therefore, > the simplest solution is to embed radiant tags into the html (if I can get > them to do the job). > > On 7/5/07, Andrew O'Brien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi Dave, > > > > > > If you want to get away from XSLT but still want to keep this XML > format, > > you could always make an extension that defines a filter and keep your > XML > > data in a separate page part (so that the filter is only applied to that > > data). There's an example filter in the trunk: > > > > http://dev.radiantcms.org/radiant/browser/trunk/extensions/sass_filter > > > > > and another extension that adds a filter on the 3rd party extension page > > (Maruku Filter I think?). > > > > > > In your filter class, you would define a "filter(text)" method that > takes > > the input text and outputs your final html. So in that method you could > > run > > over the XML with REXML or Hpricot (or any other library) and handle the > > transformation. > > > > > > Or the filter could run an XSLT transformation if one were so inclined. > > > > > > -Andrew > > > > On 7/5/07, dave4c03 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Personally, I agree with Martin Fowler on this matter. See > > > http://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/MovingAwayFromXslt.html > > > > > > Unless speed is critical I will simplicity whenever possible. > > > > > > > > > On 7/5/07, Keymone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > just curious: isn't XSLT faster than any radiant template parser? > > > > XSLT is bad only in one thing - when it goes to dynamic data, > > > > you can't change input XML on fly but XSLT parser is really good > idea > > > > for template language. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Regards, Keymone > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Radiant mailing list > > > > Post: [email protected] > > > > Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ > > > > Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Radiant mailing list > > > Post: [email protected] > > > Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ > > > Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Radiant mailing list > > Post: [email protected] > > Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ > > Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant > > > _______________________________________________ > Radiant mailing list > Post: [email protected] > Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ > Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant > _______________________________________________ Radiant mailing list Post: [email protected] Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
