[Zope] is DTML a www standard?

[sean.upton@uniontrib.com]

There are very good reasons for modularizing SQL methods, even if they do
increase your object count, IMHO...  If you have ever build a big
application in anything like ASP or other templating setup that mixes
presentation and logic, you really start to want modularization very
quickly, especially if the application has:
	1. Muliple developers
	2. Is constantly changing

I think the real solution to this problem (object clutter) is an updated
version of Transparent folders minus the namespace bug, and perhaps minus
the bug (I'm not sure if this one is reported), that makes transparent
folders break Ram Cache Managers...  As soon as a more stable version of
Transparent Folders is released, it serves as a good place to put SQL
methods and logic, leaving the presentation templates in the main folder for
simplicity's sake...

Sean

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Capesius [mailto:alanc@tech-world.com]
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 11:35 AM
Cc: zope@zope.org
Subject: RE: [Zope] is DTML a www standard?




> -----Original Message-----
> From: zope-admin@zope.org [mailto:zope-admin@zope.org]On Behalf Of Casey
> Duncan
>
> Zope page templates are attempting to do just that by making a Zope
> scripting language that is standards compliant, ala XHTML. I myself have
> not used them much, but I hear they are addicting.

I haven't tried ZPT yet. Mainly using ZSQL to front-end SQL Server now.

> My friend, one of the greatest contributions someone can make to a
> project is documentation, and you don't have to be a programmer. Feel
> free to pitch in!

Already started :)

> I would disagree. Many of the major initiatives in Zope right now: CMF,
> Page Templates, etc are focused around content management and user
> interface.

I see alot of large-scale issues, it's the little things that mean alot
though.

> To me one complex DTML
> method is much worse than 3 or 4 simple DTML/SQL methods,
> documents/scripts.

I agree, but my point was simple-query to report. This would allow one to
create a single method that incorporates both the output form and the SQL
into a single object. In my environment, this would respresent about 90% of
the SQL reports and would reduce my object count by about 40%.

> However, I think you are making Python seem a lot harder
> than it is. It is one of the easiest languages to learn and work with.

The point here is the programmer mentality. Alot of people that work with
the Web are not programmers and frankly, scripting pushes their limits.
Dependence on Python limits the market.

> I believe this is happening. Zope just needs to reach a critical mass of
> users to get truely "embraced". Once that happens, I think all hell will
> break loose.
>

In my case, unless I was friends with a guy who is very into Linux, I would
not have heard of Zope. Still wouldn't have heard of Zope and likely
wouldn't ever have heard of Zope. The Open Source, Linux and Python
communities are very insular. Probably a result of the anti-windows rhetoric
tossed around so much. (which we see sometimes within this list as well). Or
as well, a bias from the windows community. The VB, Delphi and VC++ guys are
the same and if they think they have to learn Pyhton to use Zope, they wont.
(yes, yes, in general, I feel this is accurate, there are always
exceptions... but they aren't the loudest cannon in the fort.)







_______________________________________________
Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
**   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )