Hi Gerald et al,
Not wanting to divert you from real work on Embperl 2.0, but ...
Neil Gunton started a thread back in November about how to turn off
Embperl constructs ([+, [-, [$ etc) within EmbperlObject pages, and
observed there that it using EmbperlObject as a website construction
framework is potentially quite separate from using Embperl itself within
those pages or page components. You answered his original question by
saying that your pluggable Syntax modules for Embperl 2.0 would allow a
do-nothing Syntax module that effectively just be an include, I think?
I'm just interested in how far this will go in 2.0, and what kind of
flexibility it will allow. I'm using EmbperlObject, for example, as the
framework for an intranet site I'm working on, and it's working really
well. I'm using Embperl constructs in my page objects (headers and
footers etc), but typically not in the pages themselves, so most of the
time the Execute('*') I'd like to work as Neil requested, just as a
plain include.
But I'd also like to be able to handle xml files, for example, by having
Execute('*') either use an XML/XSLT Syntax module or invoke another
apache handler to render the page, and then have it included within the
EmbperlObject composite output. Likewise, I have all these dynamic pages
generated via perl or php or binary cgi scripts that run outside of my
EmbperlObject framework at the moment - it would be great if my
Execute('*') could again pass these off to the relevant handler and just
include the output. These could be triggered either by an argument to
Execute or by some kind of EMBPERL_OBJECT_FILESMATCH_HANDLER /
EMBPERL_OBJECT_FILESMATCH_SYNTAX environment variable, perhaps.
Thoughts/comments anyone? Does this fit in with 2.0 at all Gerald?
Cheers,
Gavin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
