Tonico Strasser wrote: > Philipp von Weitershausen schrieb: > >> Tonico Strasser wrote: >> >>> Philipp von Weitershausen schrieb: >>> >>> >>>> Tonico Strasser wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Philipp von Weitershausen schrieb: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I'm not so sure that this is such a good thing. ZPT seems to enforce >>>>>> *guidelines* that not everyone might want to follow (e.g. if I >>>>>> want to >>>>>> output my XHTML as c14n or something similar). For me, ZPT's HTML >>>>>> mode >>>>>> just does too many things, most of which won't hurt to be the >>>>>> template >>>>>> author's responsibility. I definitely consider <br/> vs. <br /> >>>>>> one of >>>>>> them. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You have different use cases, obviously. For me, HTML mode is a good >>>>> thing including <br/> to <br /> conversion. (I don't like to write <br >>>>> /> all the time, all our web pages are served as text/html for >>>>> non-XHTML >>>>> browsers like MSIE, and we follow the compatibility guidelines from >>>>> the >>>>> XHTML standard). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> That's good and I agree that there should be tools that aid you in >>>> making your HTML work better with the guidelines. But if that means >>>> introducing weird obstacles for ZPT authors, I don't think these tools >>>> should be part of the ZPT renderer. If you don't want to write <br /> >>>> all the time, use a "guideline compliance maker" tool (maybe xmllint >>>> will do) and feed your template to it... Templating XML is part of >>>> ZPT's >>>> job; I question if it should do much more at this point. >>> >>> But that's why ZTPs have HTML mode, no? >> >> Yes. But rather than helping us, those features are more and more in our >> way. And with XML and HTML modes being incompatible, I rather opt for >> XML mode and sacrifice a small convenience that I could even bring back >> by using additional tools. >> >>>>> I agree that it should be possible to trigger XML mode without the >>>>> prolog for use cases like yours. >>>> >>>> >>>> That won't help because HTML mode macros and XML mode macros aren't >>>> compatible. I really would like to see XML be the default, including >>>> Zope 3's skin macros. >>> >>> >>> Yes, would also like to see this. >> >> Ah, good. It wasn't at all clear that you actually supported the >> proposal :). > > Yes, if it's still possible to trigger HTML mode. But what about > backwards compatibility if we make XML the default mode?
Well, the namespace stuff would probably account for a major breakage. Thus, over the span of two Zope releases, XML mode could be forgiveful when people forget to register namespace declarations. Of course, it would render deprecation warnings. I can't imagine a smooth transition for the other "features" of HTML mode because they are like on/off switches. Either you convert <br/> to <br /> or you don't. Same with <script ...></script> vs. <script ... /> and the other things. I think it's time to sketch out a proposal :). Philipp _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com