RE: [PHP] Website templating schemes

Joel Konkle-Parker on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 1:51 PM said: > Does that make any sense? Yes, and that's what I kind of thought you meant but just couldn't envision it completely. Chris. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: htt

Re: [PHP] Website templating schemes

> With method 2 it seems like your template file would become redundant > because every one of them would have to contain the header and footer > code. > > I would use 3 template files, header.php, footer.php, and > body_index.php > > index.php would: > > 1. PERFORM LOGIC > 2. include header > 3

RE: [PHP] Website templating schemes

Quoting "Chris W. Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > And I completely don't understand Option #2. What does body() do and > why > do you call it? Can you show some pseudo code to help us (or maybe > it's > just me) understand how Option #2 works? Browser calls index.php -- #index.php programming tas

RE: [PHP] Website templating schemes

Russell P Jones on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 10:44 AM said: > Agreed with John W. Homes regarding his method of website templating. > It is used in that fashion for all sites run by demcampaigns.com and > www.collegedems.com In that case it CAN'T be a good idea! HAR

Re: [PHP] Website templating schemes

Agreed with John W. Homes regarding his method of website templating. It is used in that fashion for all sites run by demcampaigns.com and www.collegedems.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Re: [PHP] Website templating schemes

From: "Joel Konkle-Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I'm trying to make a PHP-backed website, and I'm trying to decide between two > templating schemes: > > 1. define 2 php template files: header.php, footer.php. in index.php, require > header.php, output content, require footer.php > > 2. define a p

RE: [PHP] Website templating schemes

Joel Konkle-Parker on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 9:26 AM said: > I'm currently using the second method, but I've only seen the first > used elsewhere. Is there a reason that #1 is better than #2 (or is > anything else even better than that?)? Thought about using Smart