On 4 March 2010 22:22, Shane Hathaway sh...@hathawaymix.org wrote:
From a template developer's POV, it's useful to apply the same XML
declarations throughout a site using metal. The current syntax is
non-obvious and perhaps problematic, but workable. Some other syntax might
be better, but
On 4 March 2010 22:02, Kevin Kalupson b...@bugs.repoze.org wrote:
I wouldn't expect the the xml headers in a macro template to be applied to the
page template being rendered. It makes no sense to me that an element not
contained within a macro definition would be applied to the page calling
Malthe Borch wrote:
On 4 March 2010 22:02, Kevin Kalupson b...@bugs.repoze.org wrote:
I wouldn't expect the the xml headers in a macro template to be applied to
the
page template being rendered. It makes no sense to me that an element not
contained within a macro definition would be applied
On 3/4/10 2:08 PM, Malthe Borch wrote:
On 4 March 2010 22:02, Kevin Kalupson b...@bugs.repoze.org wrote:
I wouldn't expect the the xml headers in a macro template to be applied to
the
page template being rendered. It makes no sense to me that an element not
contained within a macro
On 3/4/10 2:22 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
Malthe Borch wrote:
On 4 March 2010 22:02, Kevin Kalupson b...@bugs.repoze.org wrote:
I wouldn't expect the the xml headers in a macro template to be applied to
the
page template being rendered. It makes no sense to me that an element not
On 4 March 2010 22:45, Kevin J. Kalupson z...@kevinkal.com wrote:
In that case, there should be macro explicitly containing the doctype
and other wanted headers.
Yes, but that's unfortunately impossible.
I don't think it's a syntax issue, I think it's a behavioral issue. I
think the 1.1
Kevin J. Kalupson wrote:
On 3/4/10 2:22 PM, Shane Hathaway wrote:
The current syntax is
non-obvious and perhaps problematic, but workable. Some other syntax
might be better, but let's not break the current syntax in the 1.1 branch.
I don't think it's a syntax issue, I think it's a
Am 04.03.2010, 17:38 Uhr, schrieb Jasper Op de Coul b...@bugs.repoze.org:
I don't have commit rights to the repoze repository but I attached a
patch.
Go on, sign up. You know you want to:
http://repoze.org/contributing.html
But I think the contribution agreement is a bit lightweight and
I just tested in zope2 through the zmi.
standard_template.pt
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC
-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd;
html metal:define-macro=page
head
title tal:content=template/titleThe Title/title
/head
body
Hey - this is
On 3/4/10 2:50 PM, Malthe Borch wrote:
On 4 March 2010 22:45, Kevin J. Kalupson z...@kevinkal.com wrote:
In that case, there should be macro explicitly containing the doctype
and other wanted headers.
Yes, but that's unfortunately impossible.
not impossible:
standard_template.pt
Kevin J. Kalupson wrote:
I just tested in zope2 through the zmi.
I seem to recall that this syntax works in Plone. I don't care whether
it works in plain Zope 2.
Is this really important to you? While it's a special case, I think
it's a case of practicality beats purity. I use it a lot.
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
Shane,
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
13 matches
Mail list logo
