Chris Withers wrote:
Ken Manheimer wrote:
Huh. We're looking for something neutral, to connote code that runs in zope to do some business logic or similar effect. It should distinguish the language used to express the logic - perl vs python vs xslt, etc. I hate "script", but it occurs to me that the "-let" convention may be useful:
Python Zopelet Perl Zopelet XSLT Zopelet
Zope-specific, runs on the server, shows the implementation language, won't be confused with non-remotely-editable functions, methods, scripts, code in general.
This is the first one with which i'm comfortable - but i may well have missed something.
...yeah, Zopelet means absolutely nothing, and will just add to confusion :-(
Chris . o O ( what the hell is a Zopelet? ;-)
I have to say that I don't like Zopelet either. I guess nobody else likes my 'Blocks' nomenclature: Python Blocks Perl Blocks DTML Blocks As I mentioned before, I tend to use DTML Methods in two contexts: - as Views on objects (Templates) - as building blocks for Views In one context (Views/Templates), the DTML method is meant to be accessed directly through the web. In the other context (Block), the DTML method is only ever accessed by a View. I would actually like to have a Block object that is not directly accessible, without having to go through some proxy-role rigamarole. Something else to consider for these two Use Cases of DTML/Python/Perl Methods/Blocks/Scripts, is that typically only the Block Use-Case is expected to be re-used through recomposition, as well as acquisition, while Templates/Views are usually re-used through Acquisition only. I'm not sure this has any impact on the 'Method Binding' argument floating around, but I thought I'd mention it again in that context. HTH, Michael Bernstein.