On Jun 30, 3:16 pm, Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jun 30, 1:41 pm, George Sakkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Because _typically_ a web template consists of mostly HTML, with > > relatively little presentational logic and (ideally) no business > > logic. Now, if all one wants to do is a quick and dirty way to, say, > > view a log file in the browser, a separate template is probably an > > The keyword here is "(ideally)". These _typical_ cases are pretty much > restricted to a helloworld-like examples or to a pure men log file > browser ;).
That's the opposite of what I said. For helloworld-like examples, a web template is an overkill. It's non-trivial applications that can show off what a template language buys you. > Real application templates quickly became complicated and > require full blown scripting engine. Zope/Plone/Trac templates are > good examples of this. What does "this" refer to? Injecting business logic or just complicated presentational logic? > > ... It's a matter of > > relative frequencies which language is the embedded one. > > Take a look at, say,http://trac.edgewall.org/browser/trunk/trac/templates > It is not obvious what relative frequency is higher. For other systems > the > situation is similar I believe. I took a look and as much as I like Python for general programming, I find these templates more readable and maintenable than straight string-concatenating Python. YMMV. George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
