[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Frank D. Cringle) wrote:
>Drew Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Ken Williams wrote:
>> >
>> > I suggest having not just a simple checkmark, but a 3-way check. A
>> > system either supports a feature, or it doesn't, or it *optionally*
>> > supports it (can be switched on and off). This is often very helpful to
>> > know, and might let one get a good sense of the differences between
>> > various systems at a glance.
>>
>> Another great idea! Should we go one farther and have a checkbox for
>> "coming in next version", or is that going to far? I'm thinking it is
>> too easy to get wrapped up in "forward looking statements" by having
>> "coming soon".
>
><unconstructive grumble>
>This sounds dreadfully microsoftian. Trashcan: check; Bouncing
>paperclip: check.
Well yeah, if you choose features that nobody cares about, then nobody will
care whether the package supports them.
Personally I think it would be really nice to have a comparison between
modules, and I think its chief purpose would NOT be to indicate which
systems are *better* than others, but what the intent of various modules
are. It would enable someone at a glance to know whether something
fills the I-am-your-entire-WWW-world niche, or is just a simple templater.
>I suspect HTML::Template will achieve the highest functionality to
>checkbox ratio.
I'm not sure what you mean. I suppose it means that even though it only
does a couple of simple things, HTML::Template is a useful tool? I
certainly don't disagree. It's got its niche, and it fills it well.
Let me get the feature ball rolling (if the ball already rolls, I apologize):
* conditional statements (if/else)
* embedded loops
* arbitrary embedded Perl code
* HTML/URI escaping on output
* integrated session handling
* controlled data caching
* modular template/component framework
* runs as PerlHandler
* Perl debugger support
* understands & modifies page's HTML
* configurable tag delimiters
This may (unintentionally) line up a little too neatly with Mason's feature
set, because it's the set I know best.
These attributes don't make one system better than another, and they
CERTAINLY don't tell the whole story, but a chart of them would help
people compare each system's goals at a glance. One of the reasons for
the proliferation of templating systems is that people can't easily
figure out what systems do what, so they just write their own slightly
different system.
