On 2. Sep 2005, at 17:01 Uhr, Sunrise Ltd wrote:
Well, my first thought was: why another templating engine? We
already have WO (either in SOPE or in gstep-web).
It would seem that your idea of "templating engine" is a little
narrow.
How to you come to this conclusion?
WO is great for webservers and templating of webcontent.
Indeed.
But there are far more templating requirements than webcontent.
Obviously.
As mentioned, the STS Template Engine was specifically designed to
generate configuration files for faceless server apps, such as in
our case
Asterisk.
And you can't do this with WO? Interesting, we can and its rather
cool for this kind of things.
It would seem that your idea of "WO" is a little narrow.
It could be used for webcontent templating, but it is specifically
designed for system configuration tasks. And for this purpose it
beats WO hands down.
If you say so.
You might want to add actual reasons on why your NIH templating is
better than WO for the task instead of accusing someone of having a
"narrow idea". Your mail has no interesting content on that actual
point.
regards,
Helge
PS: your email address doesn't work.
--
http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/
OpenGroupware.org
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
