--On 8. Januar 2007 13:01:26 -0500 "Mark, Jonathan (Integic)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"""Why (the hell) are you (still) using DTML (as newbie). You are strongly encouraged to use ZPT.""" My sense is that ZPT solves a problem which for most of us does not exist. If you wish to have designers work directly on markup in an HTML WYSIWYG editor then yes, ZPT is great.
That's a pseudo argument. I've never seen any designer working on top of a ZPT
But most of us create our own HTML anyway. And for us it doesn't matter if DTML works in a WYSIWYG HTML editor, because we don't use the latter. What does matter is that DTML is very similar to RHTML (as in Ruby On Rails), ASP, etc. ZPT requires a new way of thinking. I would much rather convert RHTML to or from DTML than to or from ZPT. So I don't really get the benefit of using ZPT. The fact that no one outside of Zope seems to have created a ZPT-like solution suggests to me that ZPT, as I said, solves a problem which doesn't exist.
The question is: what is easier to learn and to understand - DTML or ZPT? Can you explain the "nonsense" of the _ namespace in DTML to a newbie? Can you explain the sequence-item magic with all special cases to a newbie? ZPT is another approach to generate HTML. It's more logical, easier to learnand read. A person with PHP background might prefer DTML but from my experience with people starting with I can say that ZPT is more straight forward for them. ZPT has of course it's pros and cons but my general advice to people starting with Zope: thumb up for using ZPT, thumb down for using DTML.
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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 )