this seems obtuse... If arguments aren't used in this form of "helpers" then why not just use the html? (why do you need a helper?)
I may be missing something. As for the parameters, if indeed this is of use, why not something like BODY() ... as is now BODY.open(args to your heart's content) BODY.close() This is (at least) more readable and explicit in the code, and - heck - the helpers are all classes... You can extend them now. - Yarko On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 5:58 PM, Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> wrote: > > I propose to add a "close" argument to the html helpers (gluon/html.py). > > 1. If there's no close argument, then the behavior is identical the > current code. > > 2. It's an error to specify close= for a self-closing tag (like <br / > >), or to give it a value other than True or False. > > 3. close=False suppresses the closing tag. The opening tag, attributes > and components (if any) are output normally. > > 4. close=True suppresses the opening tag and attributes. The > components (if any) and closing tag are output normally. > > The general idea is to make it easier to use helpers when output is > being generated sequentially (as in welcome/views/layout.html, for > example). > > While I assert that this change is generally useful, it will also > support a proposal I intend to make aimed at making it easier to > generate valid xhtml (or html) code (without breaking legacy > applications). > > Usage, in the simplest case, would be something like this: > > {{=BODY(close=False)}} > ... > body content goes here > ... > {{=BODY(close=True}} > > This is meant to be an enabling feature only, with no enforcement > other than syntax. In particular, there would be no attempt to > prohibit a close without an open, or the like. > > I don't expect that component args will typically be used in this mode > of operation, but I see no reason to prohibit them. > > In the future, my plan is that HTML() would be smarter about > generating its DOCTYPE, and I want to encourage that use, which is > currently impractical (I think), since you either have to be prepared > with all the components, or else create and then edit (extensively) > the HTML object. > > Discussion is welcome. I'd prefer a syntax along the lines of > BODY(open) and BODY(close), but I don't see a straightforward way of > doing it. > > If there's no objection, I'll create a patch. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py Web Framework" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
