[Zope3-dev] Re: Re: tal:define="..." considered harmful?

[Jean-Marc Orliaguet]

Balazs Ree wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 16:41:36 +0100 Martijn Faassen wrote:
>  
>
>>A separate svn project would be nice. I'm sure z3lab is open; it's also
>>welcome under the z3 base on codespeak.
>>    
>>
>
>I will then check it in to one of those; seriously, I can't decide which
>location would be more proper as a home. The z3base seems more generic to
>me, however the other ajax stuff is already in z3lab. (except AZAX, which
>has the "kukit" part stored on codespeak.)
>
>I am facing the same decision at where to bring in the "jsonserver"
>(a.k.a. json-rpc) product which would be a complete zope2-zope3 product
>merge.
>
>  
>

sure, whatever

>>Are you interested in recovering some of there Zope TAL based regex stuff
>>from Sapling? I'd be happy to merge it in. ctal doesn't appear to have
>>this yet. 
>>    
>>
>
>I must have a look, of course any enhancement would be great - and since
>the main user at the moment is Jean-Marc, I would be interested in his
>opinion.
>
>  
>

if it doesn't slow things down or add features that are not really 
needed, I think it's fine, but maybe an explanation would be good as to 
what it does?

BTW one enhancement that I was thinking of was the ctal:attributes="..." 
stuff, I find the i18n:attributes="..." approach more intutive since it 
is possible to write code as if it was HTML first, insert the variables 
where they should be and then specify afterwards which attributes are to 
be replaced:

<a href="item/url" ctal:attributes="href">...</a>

instead of:

<a href="" ctal:attributes="href item/url">...</a>

(which removes an indirection)

the ZPT tal:attributes=... syntax forces me to think to much

but that's just a personal opinion

I really think that the best way to add features is to create a sample 
applications and see what's missing in the language or what feels 
unnatural or too complicated to achieve, but basically if a missing 
feature forces you to move the logic to the data model, it is definitely 
not a missing feature. I believe that ZPT is too much of a scripting 
language.

also I think that one namespace is enough (no "context/title", 
"request/user"), but use "title" and "user" instead ... extra namespaces 
in a template are a sign that the view has not done a good job at 
preparing a data structure for the template to render it.

>>'ctal' is a somewhat confusing name by the way, you'd think it
>>was TAL implemented in C, another interesting project I've dabbled with on
>>and off in the past.
>>    
>>
>
>I agree but if we change the name we should do it right now. What name
>(prefix) would you suggest? Only thing, it needs to be different from
>"tal" (since it must allow mixing the two namespaces in the same page) and
>I personally would also be against "jtal". "ctal" was meant to stand for
>"client tal" but indeed it might not be the finest choice.
>
>  
>
that's what I guessed too, do I win something ? :-)

/JM