[Grok-dev] Re: proposal: grok.title() and grok.description()
tseaver at palladion.com
Fri Aug 31 10:58:56 EDT 2007
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Martijn Faassen wrote:
> Hi there,
> Inspired by Tres's idea of grok.describe(), I'd like to propose two new
> grok directives:
> The arguments to both is a unicode string or a message id: human
> readable text.
Can we stay with the grokkish convention that ASCII strings are alllowed
as well? I *hate* the dead chicken of the leading 'u'.
> These directives should be usable on just about any class, ranging from
> Model to View to Permission.
> The idea is then that an application's user interface can access this
> data (this means we need to come up with a good API to access this kind
> of grok-defined attribute in the grok module. Anyone have any ideas?).
How about assigning '__doc__' on the object ;)? Actually, one might
hack the directives so that they *returned* the values when passed a
non-basestring / message ID object.
> The application's UI can then use this information to display things
> like menus and add lists, or lists of permissions, etc, etc.
> The idea is to standardize a simple mechanism for this that people can
> start using for their own purposes.
> Of course, the admin UI can probably also productively use this
> information. If needed I could imagine some grok.info() directive or
> somesuch that contains only information to be used by the admin UI as
> opposed to information for end-user consumption (though docstrings might
> serve this purpose). The admin UI would of course also be able to use
> 'title' and 'description' on the application object.
> We need sensible defaults for these two attributes. grok.description()
> should default to grok.title().
I'd rather see it default to empty.
> What about grok.title()? I think it
> would be bad if grok.title() defaulted to the empty string, as these
> don't show up in the user interface and give no clue as to what object
> you're dealing with. I therefore propose grok.title() should default to
> the class name. This gives a good hint on what's going on in a user
> interface where someone hasn't spelled out grok.title() yet for a
> particular class, which can then be easily fixed.
Defaulting to '__name__' is probably fine. Another option is to do the
"first line, rest" splitting of '__doc__'.
> What do people think?
Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver at palladion.com
Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Grok-dev