Tres Seaver wrote at 2005-10-16 14:22 -0400: > ... >> Probably, because they can bind the DTML namespace... > >I knew that they *could* bind it; it just don't understand why anyone >would *want* that feature, given the availability of the other, >non-ambiguous bindings.
I know that I used it intensively in the past (for a former employer). Now, I almost dropped DTML and with it the DTML namespace bindung of Python Scripts, although it works as well with the ZPT namespace... >I would argue that it is a misfeature, especially given the bug which it >surfaces in 'render' / 'call_with_ns'. I have seen this several times: When a bug comes to the surface, a feature is reclassified as a misfeature... I do not need this feature (unlike other reclassified things) but maybe, fixing the bug is also a solution? >=nIvs >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Dieter _______________________________________________ Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests
