Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 14:48, Charlie Clark
> <charlie.cl...@clark-consulting.eu> wrote:
>> This is something I would like to contribute to as it matches my skillset
>> and interests pretty well. From the responses so far it seems that most
>> people are so used to the ZMI that no change feels necessary and, let's
>> face it, it works well enough. However, for new people coming to Zope the
>> 1990nish of it is a bit off-putting: we've got all this cool technology
>> underneath but you wouldn't believe it when you look at it.
> Well, getting and iframe implementation with some really nice looking
> CSS would be cool, indeed. I don't even think you need to get rid of
> DTML for that.

I agree.

I was asking for 2 different things: One to improve ZMI and the other 
one about DTML.

There's not much to speak about ZMI because we should just do it, in 
particular i'm interested do smt like that, so i could work with Charlie 
Clark and any other person interested, until we've something to show, 
then ask for feedback and so on.

Regarding DTML... i wonder if it dtml purpose doesn't overlap with 
tal/metal or even viewlets. If that's the case we wouldn't provide
'One-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it' and for non Dutch 
newbies :P is kinda confusing because end up with situations like 
'you've to learn it but you won't use in-real-projects'.

So, wouldn't make sense to have DTML in an separated component and make 
its use optional ?.

No big deal, I'm just curious what do you think about it and it is an 
excuse to ask about existing ways to handle stuff like that.

Kind Regards

Let's promote Plone Worldwide: http://worldploneday.org - April 28th 2010.

Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to