Okay, so now it's clear to me that some of the crosstalk on my proposal was due to terminology issues. I'd like to propose a revised terminology for discussing the various attempts at a templating standard, specifically:
publisher - the part of a system that determines what template is to be used, usually in the form of an ID, path, or other symbolic name of a template manager - the part of a system that manages the conversion from a template identifier to something executable, by finding the source code and compiling it. (or retrieving it from a cache, etc.) compiler - the part of a system that knows how to convert the source of a template into something executable resource - the "something executable" created by the compiler and returned or cached by the manager, for use by the publisher. Does this make sense to everybody? I think this will help us figure out what will and won't work for systems that put different things on different sides of the "framework/template" line, since it seems there are some template systems that include a "manager" and some that do not, and there are some frameworks that include a "manager" and some that do not. My proposal was based on an assumption that framework usually means a publisher+manager, and a template engine means a compiler+resources. I'm not sure if it is as useful when the template engine means a manager+compiler+resources, but think we should explore that a bit more. It may also be that there are useful opportunities to standardize or library-ize other parts of this stack than have been discussed so far. _______________________________________________ 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
