Benji York wrote:
> >> One downside to the expanded interface directive is that it hides  the
> >> fact that a utility is also being created.  I actually prefer  the
> >> browser:skin version because it totally hides the underlying  "atomic"
> >> operations, but the <interface>-also-registers-a-utility  version
> >> conflates two atomic operations.
> >
> >
> > That's what it does now.  All Philipp's revised proposal does is have
> > zcml expose the 'id' attribute in
> >  AFAICT there are no
> > other necessary changes to do what he suggested (for this part of the
> > story).
> In that case a +0 from me.  I still have some (possibly purely
> aesthetic) desire to define a small set of basic building blocks and
> define (mostly) everything else with them.

I'm the same way. My suggestion was merely a compromise to make the necessary
ZCML not double or triple in length after in this proposal. The good news is
that the 'complicated' way of first making the interface a skin and then
registering it under the skin name will still work. It's just longer (and, as
a side effect, registers the interface twice, once under its dotted name and
once under its skin name).

I updated the proposal ( to mention
the shortcut.

Given that there don't seem to be other objections, I will start implementing
the proposal this weekend. Thanks for all your input!


This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Zope3-dev mailing list

Reply via email to