Saturday, October 8, 2005, 4:42:10 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote: > Daniel Dekany wrote: >> No template language can be too good at that... Simply, the basic idea >> of a template languages is incompatible with strict white-space control. > > On the contrary, template languages are *IDEAL* for strict white-space > control. That's the whole "template" part of template language. A > template language is a means to specify an exact output format, and > whitespace is part of that. Even velocity has "strict white-space > control." It just happens to have a non-intuitive implementation.
What I'm talking about is that of course you want *easily readable* templates, not some cryptic character soup. That's important, right? What's the point of template engines like Velocity otherwise. So you insert a lot of extra WS (indentation, line-break) around directives just so the template is easy to read. The problem is, that this WS will count as static text, in the basic case at least. With other words, your "source code formatting" interferes with the output that you actually meant to be printed. I have never seen a solution for this where one could say that the WS is precisely and easily controlled. (That is, not for general purpose (output format unaware) text template engine.) -- Best regards, Daniel Dekany --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
