[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi Philipp > >>> IMO it would be great to solve this properly, because one point of >>> using views is to have a fine control over what to publish >> and what not. >>> And this is a bit broken at this point, currently. >> Right, that's why page templates that just provide macros >> should be registered unpublishable browser views and not >> browser pages. >> >> You see how far into the confusion the <browser:page /> >> directive has brought us? > > Yes, > but this is only a problem how we lookup views/pages > via /@@ in templates.
That's how we lookup views. @@ is short for ++view++. Traversal namespaces are the way to lookup things that are not direct attributes. > The implementation of a *provider* > tales expression for viewlet manager totaly avoids this :-) As I said in another post, I think tales expressions are abused there. For looking up views, would you not use ++view++ but rather a view: TALES expression? Or for resources? I think not. Getting from an object to a view (=view,page,viewlet,etc.) of this object is traversal. It belongs into a traversal adapter. Philipp _______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3-dev@zope.org Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com