Okay,
After looking at the Freemarker stuff and thinking about yesterday's
conversations, here's what I see:
With the current WebMacro service you have two main options on how
you can handle Layouts, etc...
1. Use Turbine Layouts and Navigations with ECS or plain WebMacro pages.
If I want to use ECS for my Layouts and Navigations just add the WebMacro
page to the body of the document. This is how I do it with the Scheduler
interface. OR, use Turbine Layouts and instead of writing the navigation bars
in ECS, write them in small WebMacro(HTML) fragments and glue the page together
in the normal Turbine fashion (i.e append to the body of the document).
2. Set the Layout to NULL and return the entire body in WebMacro using the
#parse
include for the navigation bars if you wish.
With this in mind, the current implementation is not so bad. the *ONLY*
problem I see is that the Document in RunData automatically creates the
shell of the HTML document. Which means, no matter which option you choose
above, you never add <html>,<head>, and <body> tags to your WebMacro pages
(see the scheduler interface pages) otherwise you'll end up duplicating them
in the output.
So, with the current implementation I get TWO options on how I can use
WebMacro in Turbine. If change the Service to bypass the RunData
document, you'll be able to assemble the entire page in Webmacro
(<html><head><body>) tags
but you'll have less flexibility in using Layouts etc...
My recommendation is to leave the current Service as is - it has the most
flexibility.
Let users define the Layouts and Navigations as they wish. We'll provide the
BaseWebMacroScreen they can extend. The only thing I want to change is the
return type on handleTemplate() and clean up the BaseWebMacroScreen.
Please give me your thoughts on this.
--
Dave
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
your flame > /dev/null
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
