Cool. that makes sense. So here's a question that didn't seem immediately
obvious from the docs and could possibly be made clearer as a foot note in
there somewhere ( or maybe I just missed it ), can context be used with an
interface? I totally understand the motivation to not force people to
understand or care about the ZCA and interfaces, but again, a big motivator
for me in switching to bfg is the ZCA integration, so *maybe* it could be
mentioned more obviously that we can do view look up by interface as well as
class name?

It's just a gut impression I had reading the new docs, they are excellent
and super clear, but I feel like it's harder to make the connection with the
under-the-hood Zope based principals than it could be.

Thanks for all your work on the excellent documentation.


On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 8:31 AM, Chris McDonough <> wrote:

> On 4/8/10 1:23 AM, Iain Duncan wrote:
>> Well, now you would have to know what you were looking for, whereas in
>> the older docs, it was quite prominent in the narrative documentation. I
>> realize this is a personal preference thing, and of course you'll do
>> what you think is best, but as someone who came to repoze.bfg and zope
>> at the same time, I found it easier to make the connections between
>> examples of non-bfg zope apps and the bfg docs when the similarities
>> were more exposed, and that was a major bonus for me for BFG.
>> Just my two cents really. If it were up to me, I would add examples in
>> the narrative docs earlier that used a totally Zope like layout, with
>> for="ISomeInterface".
> I just changed cluegun to use "context=" (as well as renderers and various
> other newer BFG constructs).
> While we don't want to be stupid about it ("different for the sake of being
> different"), fidelity with Zope is not a real goal.  That argument is
> best-documented as "context" because it names the context type.  Grok calls
> it "context" as well.  Zope calls it "for", and that's fine, but you can
> definitely imagine someone else asking "why isn't this named context,
> because it names the context", right?  And they'd be just as right.  Names
> suck, of course.
> - C
Repoze-dev mailing list

Reply via email to