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. Iain On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 8:31 AM, Chris McDonough <chr...@plope.com> 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 Repozefirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.repoze.org/listinfo/repoze-dev