At 12:34 PM 11/09/2001 -0600, Clint Jeffery wrote:
>Wade,
>
>I like your ideas. Backward compatibility is a good thing, so if you really
>can't stand (or fix) cgi.icn's main(), maybe we should move non-dependent
>library functions into a cgilib.icn that is linked by cgi.icn. What is it
>about cgi.icn's main() that you object to?
Yes, I agree, cgilib.icn and cgi.icn would be a better idea.
The main() in cgi is not as flexible as I would like WRT to HTML. For
instance, there is a <!DOCTYPE> tag I usually put in my hand-coded
documents, and for XHTML there's an <?xml> tag, too. Both of these go
before the <html> tag. By the same token, it forgets about other stuff that
can go into the <head> section, such as stylesheets and meta information.
These, I was going to add support for, though.
But the principle problem I have with cgi.icn's main() is that sometimes
you want your code to generate *everything*. I'm currently building an HTML
template script in Unicon that has this requirement because all the HTML is
specified in template files. Have a look at
http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=7992 for some
information I posted on an IT web forum I'm part of.
For simple stuff, cgi.icn's main() is fine and I'll probably use it. Just
not this time. :-)
>You can send your additions/improvements to the list, or you can send them
>to me for review. Either way, accepted contributions eventually make their
>way into the CVS repository and thence into the source and binary
>distributions. I would suggest posting whole files to a web site if you
>have one, and announcing their location on the list.
Okay. I'll put them up on my web server.
Wade Bowmer.
_______________________________________________
Unicon-group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unicon-group
