sorry, clicked "enter" unintenionaly: IMO there are two disatvanatages in TG: 1) lack of chosing template language (which is kind of religion) 2) lack of url-name mapper
I heard second will be fixed using routes. Fixing first issue would be big step towards users - eg. I have big template library in cheetah and dont want to rewrite them. Maybe additional value for decorator (tmpl_language = "KID") would do? I think i could code decorator to use cheetah template, but heard that tg uses incremental sending - kid sends rendered part of template, what couldnt be done in cheetah. What do you think? 2005/12/22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > IMO there are two disatvanatages in TG: > 1 > > 2005/12/22, Peter Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Not to mention that Kid can't do CSS. Even Zope, which was (to my > > knowledge) the first framework to use attribute-based templating, needs > > to break down and use DTML to generate other document formats such as > > CSS. > > > > It seems to me like it is too late to switch templating languages, > > unfortunately. This is Kevin Dangoor's framework, let him decide :) > > > > Peter Hunt > > > > >
