At 02:36 PM 2/5/2006 -0600, Ian Bicking wrote: >I think very minor fixes could improve it -- for instance, allow >template_filename as an argument instead of only template_name. Then at >least simple template filling would be handled well (e.g., enough for >Paste Script), though it is unlikely (with only those specs) that >templates will handle including other templates very well, as there's not >even sufficient information given for the template language to figure out >the programmer's intent.
But this is precisely why I think a spec to the level you're describing is premature. You're basically saying that the template deployment situation is all fouled up, so we need to allow for more balkanization. My original statement on this topic was that what we need to do is get a standard for template/resource *deployment* so that there's a path for cleaning up the balkanization. Sure, no framework that exists is going to currently match exactly whatever spec we come up with for deployment, but I think we could come up with a layout that would support every framework's use cases and that everybody could agree it made sense to add support for. _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
