Wow, thanks for the replies guys.  It's good to hear I am not the only
one who likes DTML.

Tino, thanks for the explanations.  I have some thoughts below on
that, and keep in mind, I am questioning from my own ignorance.

Tino Wrote:
> The major drawbacks of DTML are:
> 
> - one namespace (with transparent layers)  
One namespace?  Why do you need more?  I havent had any problems with
one.  Can you give some examples of why this is important or how it
would be useful?

> - confusing naming of tags, like <dtml-var> which
>   really is <dtml-print> or something
Well I realize that it could be named something else, but it never
occured to me.  I dont think it's confusing.  I mean, in DTML you use
4 tags more than any other, IN, VAR, IF, and CALL.  Simple.  And if
there is one thing I have learned over the few years I have been
programming, it is to keep it simple. Simple works.

> - and the extra tags for flow control, but probably
>   the dtml fans can live with it.
Yeah, simple.  We can live with it, particularly since we can call
more detailed functionality from Python.

> - peoples practice to use <dtml-var foo> even inside
>   html-tags attributes, where &dtml-foo; should be used.
Hmm.. Never thought of that one as I too just use the full <dtml-var
foo>.  I can see now that it might make readability a little better to
use &dtml, but is there a technical reason for using it that way?

Thank you again for your input Tino.  I can understand the need to
take Zope to another level, its the nature of things to keep them
growing.  And changing Zope to fit the needs of large scale
applications is good, I just hate to see the sacrifice of the smaller
apps needs.  I probably will never get to work on enterprise class
systems, in fact I really dont want to, but Zope works beautifully for
the small web apps and that's what I want to work on.  I wonder what
the ratio is of Zope users who use small apps to those who do large
apps?

Thanks again!

Greg

On 5/26/05, Tino Wildenhain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 27.05.2005, 00:20 +0200 schrieb Jaroslav Lukesh:
> ...
> > I absolutelly agree with you, it is like my words.
> >
> > But separation of logic and presentation could be done successfully in DTML
> > too. ZPT, which have "separation argument" is not as easy to make totally
> 
> This is even somewhat correct. If people had the discipline to not abuse
> the templating to do complicated logic.
> The major drawbacks of DTML are:
> 
> - one namespace (with transparent layers)
> - confusing naming of tags, like <dtml-var> which
>   really is <dtml-print> or something
> - and the extra tags for flow control, but probably
>   the dtml fans can live with it.
> - peoples practice to use <dtml-var foo> even inside
>   html-tags attributes, where &dtml-foo; should be used.
> 
> > separated design as marketing says, for example see Plone - try to customize
> > plone site to absolutelly different custom design - it is near impossible.
> 
> Unfortunately Plone is still a bad example for ZPT. It is getting
> better but still it has a lot of code and definition in the templates.
> Maybe AT would be a way out.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
> http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
> **   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
> (Related lists -
>  http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
>  http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
> 


-- 
Greg Fischer
1st Byte Solutions
http://www.1stbyte.com
_______________________________________________
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists -
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )

Reply via email to