On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 5:37 AM, Thierry Florac <tflo...@ulthar.net> wrote:
> Hi,
> I think ZCA doesn't do "so much more" than implement a few object design
> patterns and provide a very flexible components registry framework.
> I'm working mainly on developing new framework-like packages and I just
> can't work without it except by re-inventing it!
> Many users blame ZCML just because it's XML !

As well they should! 0.5 ;)

> But it's just configuration, and separating configuration from
> Python code is one of the greatest benefits of ZCML, mainly while
> working on huge projects. The XML format is just a detail and is
> probably not so worse than many INI-like or text based configuration
> format; and at least it's a de-facto standard.

When I started working on zcml, it used a very light-weight but custom
syntax.  I was talked in to using XML by someone who later complained
about it. :)  I regret not sticking with the lighter weight syntax.


P.S. ZCML uses a pretty lightweight style of XML, relying more on
       attributes than on nested elements. Ironically/typically I was
       criticized for this by XML purists.

Jim Fulton
Zope3-users mailing list

Reply via email to