Sorry about sending from the wrong email address - thanks for grabbing
the relevant bit and putting it back in the thread.
On 3/4/10 9:47 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
> Kevin Kalupson wrote:
>> The importance to me is that there isn't a regression to the duplicate
>> xml headers when templates render. I like to validate my templates as I
>> go and not have to hack them to then test my rendered template.
> Good point. If you're statically validating all templates, then putting
> the doctype in every template is a good thing.
I think that this is the way to go with zpt and is the often forgotten
beauty of zpt. Because you can do this is what makes it better than a
lot of other templating languages out there.
However, if you're not
> statically validating, then putting the doctype in every template is
> hazardous, because it's easy to forget, and if you forget, the browser
> quietly slips into quirks mode, causing insidious little CSS bugs.
> The moral: I guess static template validation would have saved me those
> hours I spent debugging CSS this week, and maybe putting the doctype in
> the main template has more cons than pros.
Repoze-dev mailing list