On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 11:22:56AM +0100, Alexander Limi wrote:
> This reminds me of a thing Steve Alexander and myself talked about when
> working together on a project using Zope 3 a while back:
>
> One of the ugliest and most error-prone parts of TAL is its handling of
> multiple attributes
Alexander Limi wrote at 2005-12-30 11:22 +0100:
> ...
>One of the ugliest and most error-prone parts of TAL is its handling of
>multiple attributes:
>
>
>
Why is this more ugly or error prone as your proposal?
> ...
>This provides the following benefits:
>
>- Easier to parse for XML tools (no s
Andreas Jung wrote:
--On 30. Dezember 2005 11:50:16 -0500 Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm gonna stay out of this except to note that this discussion should
be happening on the ZPT list (zpt@zope.org), as it affects much more than
Zope 3 (or even Zope for that matter).
Wasn't the
On 12/30/05, Andreas Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wasn't the ZPT list considered obsolete some time ago?
No. The ZIP list is dead. I think there was a suggestion that the
ZPT list should be closed, but I disagreed with that since there are a
number of ZPT users outside of Zope, including us
--On 30. Dezember 2005 11:50:16 -0500 Jim Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm gonna stay out of this except to note that this discussion should
be happening on the ZPT list (zpt@zope.org), as it affects much more than
Zope 3 (or even Zope for that matter).
Wasn't the ZPT list considered
I'm gonna stay out of this except to note that this discussion should
be happening on the ZPT list (zpt@zope.org), as it affects much more than
Zope 3 (or even Zope for that matter).
Jim
--
Jim Fulton mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Python Powered!
CTO (540) 361-1714
On 12/30/05, Jeff Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - the TAL namespace had a limited and proper list of attributes. A
> very limited set of names that could be (theoretically) validated with
> standard XML tools.
This should probably remain a goal, but I don't think it's as big a
deal as the ord
--On 30. Dezember 2005 08:22:18 -0700 Jeff Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
The same would probably be relevant for tal:defines, something like:
- It looks nice! :)
That's relative.
It would call it: syntactic sugar.
-aj
pgpum1nYYWhKO.pgp
Description: PGP signature
__
On 12/30/05, Alexander Limi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:49:46 +0100, Philipp von Weitershausen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I think it would be quite possible to do explicit key or attribute
> > lookup with TALES, e.g.:
> >
> > foo/attr:bar (for foo.bar)
> > foo/k
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:49:46 +0100, Philipp von Weitershausen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think it would be quite possible to do explicit key or attribute
lookup with TALES, e.g.:
foo/attr:bar (for foo.bar)
foo/key:bar (for foo['bar'])
foo/item:1(for foo[1])
This reminds me of
10 matches
Mail list logo