In a fit of coincidental timing, I was just being frustrated by this very issue with inclusion tags today. I'm +1 on supporting kwargs with "=". It is in fact *more* familiar to someone who works with HTML to be able to assign attributes in arbitrary order, for example:
<a href="http://example.com"; class="green" id="my_id"> works the same as: <a id="my_id" class="green" href="http://example.com";> whereas this is just nonsense: <a "http://example.com"; "my_id" "green"> and this is even more broken: <a http://example.com as src and my_id as id and green as class> So any argument about not using kwargs being "for template authors" seems a bit silly to me. Designers may not be programmers (though many of them are these days), but the reality of the tools they already use is that this is a familiar syntax. All the best, - Gabriel On Nov 8, 7:16 pm, Peter Baumgartner <sgt.hu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 5:37 AM, silent1mezzo <adammcker...@gmail.com> wrote: > > +1 for {% include "foo.html" x=1 y=2 %} > > > This just seems more natural. My designer agreed based on the {% url > > %} tags. > > +1 for using the = syntax here. My reasons have been mentioned above, > but to recap: > > * and/as gets too verbose and difficult to read if you add more than a > couple variables > * HTML uses "=" to set attributes, so this shouldn't be a new paradigm > for template authors > > -- Pete -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
