Aye, there's absolutely no way HAML is going to fly with the majority of people building skins. Instead of "Why the hell do I have to insert all this junk just to make my skin work right? I'm going back to WordPress." kind of issue we had before I cleaned up the skin system we'll end up with a "What the hell is this syntax? I'm going back to Drupal." kind of issue.
It also isn't any better than the current state we're in for context sensitivity. I already mentioned that XSLT isn't usable. It's not usable as a syntax, and it's not usable as a implementation technique for transforming syntax. We can't take calls back to handle things like i18n with it... The compatibility issues with it are also in a way worse than the other parts of xml in php. If all else fails parsing xml and doing transformations or compiling to php ourselves isn't all too hard. But XSLT? No way in hell will we try to re-implement xslt in basic php for compatibility without xslt installed. sass is another story though, we're talking about templates here. But, the scss mode of sass is pretty much just css with enhancements so it might work to add support for it. As long as people don't go to overboard with it. We don't want to see people using the import functionality when we're handling concat in RL. And we don't want to see private mixins being used for vendor prefixes we should really be adding compatibility for shortcuts for into core RL. I'm not to keen on Compass that phamlp includes though. Their border-radius doesn't inspire confidence that they actually know what vendor prefixes are supposed to be used. I'd like to avoid enabling that portion of it. ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name] On 11-09-08 10:23 AM, Trevor Parscal wrote: > My main complaint with Haml and Sass are that they introduce yet another > syntax, all while trying to simplify things. On the other extreme XSLT uses > XML syntax, but can get pretty complex, usually unnecessarily so - it also > introduces XPath, which some developers may not know. > > Ideally we should find something in the middle. > > - Trevor > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Ashar Voultoiz <hashar+...@free.fr> wrote: > >> On 06/09/11 08:27, Daniel Friesen wrote: >> <snip> >>> So, I'd love to see other peoples ideas on the best syntax for our skin >>> system. >>> Or ideas or comments on how to fix the problem with the syntax I came up >>> with. >> Can you possibly have a look at HAML? It is a basic language that makes >> HTML 'simpler' and allow variables, if, foreach : http://haml-lang.com/ >> >> It comes from the ruby on rails community but has an implementation in >> PHP : http://phphaml.sourceforge.net/ The page has an example :-) >> >> Might be better than reinventing the wheel. >> >> Another possibility will be to generate an XML document and apply a XSLT >> stylesheet on it. But I am not sure it will make things easier. >> >> >> PS: CSS have a similar abstract language: http://sass-lang.com/ >> >> -- >> Ashar Voultoiz >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikitech-l mailing list >> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l >> -- ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name] _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
