On 9/14/07, Christian Zagrodnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So you're suggesting using ++api++ to choose the request type for all
> IHTTPRequests. That's fine for me.

This is good; if we think about the current "skin" namespace as really
being about the *request* rather than the browser presentation (which
certainly fits my mental model better), then it should apply to all
request types, not just IBrowserRequest.

This suggests that there's not as much common understanding of what
"skin" means, and there's historical baggage in it.

> I just wonder why I should remove
> the "skin" support for XML-RPC since that is just choosing the
> request type...

Can't say I've ever advocated removing that, but I'm one of those
skin-means-request-type folks.

I suspect the hangup some people have is really about the "skin" name
for something that's not about browser presentation.


Fred L. Drake, Jr.    <fdrake at gmail.com>
"Chaos is the score upon which reality is written." --Henry Miller
Zope3-dev mailing list
Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to