Kevin Dangoor wrote: > On 1/31/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Unlike Jim, I'm also actively *against* having such a spec because it >> creates the illusion that a useful problem has been solved. I don't have >> anything against the Turbo/Buffet API, mind you, I just don't want it >> anywhere near a PEP. It's a niche solution to a niche problem, which is >> allowing web frameworks to offer an illusion of choice to developers. > > There may need to be two discussions here. There are some minor tweaks > to the current TurboGears template plugin spec that people want. I > don't know how many people are using those plugins, but I do know that > there are at least three. I'm fine with taking a first step of making > our changes to the simple variable-to-string interface and having that > be a de facto standard among those of us using these plugins.
I am fine with that. While the current vars-to-strings template plugins might not solve any "interesting" problems, they can (and do) make life easier for folks writing web apps in frameworks that use them. > If we can devise a standard that builds on WSGI in some useful way and > allows for more uses and wider adoption, as Phillip suggests, that > does seem like a fine goal for the web-sig. That effort is not going > to stop or hinder those of us who are already using these template > engine plugins happily, so I don't think we need to look at this as an > either-or proposition. The PEP would only cover the larger standard, > but we can still make good use of the tools we have today. Right. Christian http://www.dowski.com ps - my first post to the WEB-SIG :-) _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
