"Christopher G. Petrilli" wrote:
One final note, looking at the DTML parser (which may require some heavy changes for the the &ztml; trick, since currently I don't think it handles such things, just <> thingies :-) ... BUT there's some cruft left in there that uses the old %() form of DTML... is this something we can remove? I'm curious, I don't know how much ofit there is, but I'm wondering if there's really anyone USING it?! :-)
I have found it very useful when generating DTML templates. It would be a real pain to generate them using DTML itself, as it terminally confuses me (and probably the parser as well So - having two syntaxes for the same thing is A Good Thing, please dont drop it.
I understand it might be more natural for Python people, but... I fear that with the new syntax I'm proposing <?ztml ...?> that it will be too many options, and some users heads might explode... something I personally don't want to recover.
Three syntaxes may be an overkill, but we can allways declare one of them deprecated and not recommend it ;) ------------ Hannu