Martijn Faassen wrote: > I don't see the problem with learning new ZCML directives when I'm > learning a new package. I can see why you'd like to reduce the > occurence, and I think sometimes configuring things in ZCML is actually > doing it in the wrong place, as information needs to be persistent > sometimes.
I agree. Having to remember how to work with a new ZCML directive *is* a burden, though. Given that we're all Python programmers, I would say that it's more of a burden than having to remember a Python API. > Moreover, sometimes a package introduces new ways to configure > components. Five does so, for instance, and Silva will too eventually. I would really like to hear what kind of directives you imagine for Silva here (and what you mean by "new ways to configure components"). > Sometimes a new, short directive is a lot easier to > remember than to remember long.dotted.names.pointing.to.places and 3 > directives. Having to remember (or worse, look up) long dotted names is > extremely common in ZCML and I consider it at least as big a problem as > having to learn directives. I agree. Many of these long dotted names belong into Python, though. > Let's use abstraction and naming things where it makes sense. > > Heh, perhaps we need to go the other way and add a namespace directive > for long dotted names instead. :) -1. > > That said, there might still be a small percentage of cases where custom > > directives are a valid tool. I can accept their being on the same > > namespace as > > others. In fact, I would like it to be that way, reducing the amount of > > dead chickens (namespace declarations). > > Namespace declarations are not dead chickens. They're things that the > XML language requires. Indentation and colons are not dead chickens in > Python either. *particular* namespace declarations may be unnecessary - > but not dead chickens, just perhaps the wrong solution. Yeah, sorry, bad wording. I just think having to declare 3 to 5 different namespaces on the top of the file of which some have no apparent meaning or distinction seems like clutter to me. Note that I absolutely see the necessity for namespace declarations. For example, I would like to see ZPT require the declaration of TAL, METAL and I18N namespaces. Note that there the entire namespace story is different. There they are used for what I think namespaces are intended, separating several XML models (e.g. the HTML model from the additional TAL/METAL/I18N model). Philipp ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3firstname.lastname@example.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com