On Monday 12 December 2005 16:29, Dominik Huber wrote:
> 1. The brand *skin* and *layer* are fairly common and they are
> reflecting two logical uses cases. At a first glance the usage for a
> layer type is not given, but the layer concept is still interesting to
> build modular skins. The layer audience could be the developers which
> like to share layer specific informations. IMO an use case for an
> Browser Layer Names utility could be a corresponding
> online-documentation within the api-doc. I would suggest to register the
> layers like skins using a ILayerBrowserType interface:
> <interface
>           interface=".interfaces.I18NFeatures"
>           type="zope.publisher.interfaces.browser.IBrowserLayerType"
>           />
> 2. I liked the naming ISkinType and ILayerType much more (instead of
> IBrowserSkinType/ IBrowserLayerType), because this browser-specific
> differentiation is already given by the package hierarchy and those
> ILongCamelCaseWordingsThatTriesToExplainEverything are hard to type and
> at the end they confuse newcomers even more than the simple ones. Please
> keep the naming also simple and stupid like the skinning simplification
> itself  :)
Two good points I agree with. I wanted to write a similar response as 1., but 
did not have a good argument. Dominik just gave it. I think it is important
to keep a registry of all layers, especially for TTW development, an area I 
really want to put some effort in for 3.3.

Stephan Richter
CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training
Zope3-dev mailing list
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to