At 04:55 PM 6/15/99 +0200, Martijn Faassen wrote:
Yes, I'll add a 'me too!' here. Looking like Python is very important. DTML is too Perlish in that it has verbose syntax with a lot of weird characters, and too many ways to do the same thing at times.
Much as I dig Python, I'd have to disagree on this one. I'm the original language slut -- I'll learn the basics of anything if it'll make my life easier and I'll teach anybody what I know if it'll help me get out of the office at 5:30pm on a Friday night instead of at 7pm. The fledgling DTML seems to be what IBM planned for SEQUEL (precursor to SQL) back in the 70's: An easy way for end users to write their own reports without needing the Wizards at the data center. DTML as it is right now is too hard for simpletons, erm, average users to write this stuff. And yes, the Perl-like line noise doesn't help. SQL, with multi table inner joins, unions, and the like, is really too hard for non-power users. But simple selects and updates can be absorbed by anybody who's not dumb as a box of rocks. Keeping DTML simple (and simplifying the namespaces as you point out is an excellent example of simplification) will advance it. Obfuscation will prevent its acceptance. I have seen the light, brother!
I think what we need is a way to somehow visually and syntactically clearly distinguish what is HTML and what is DTML or even better something closer to what Python is. Perhaps turn things around and mark the *HTML* instead of marking the (Pythonic) logic.
Like CGI.pm? Ouch! Have you ever tried to do anyting *big* in CGI.pm? :-) You don't want to, trust me. I think that's a slippery slope. Suddenly there will be More Than One Way To Do It and we all know where that'll lead. Ask anybody who's had to use Lotus Domino and learn both LotusScript and the obscure @Macro Language. I-hope-we-can-still-be-friends-ly yours, Jules -- "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it. Although that way may not be obvious at first unless you're Dutch." -- Tim <0.8 wink> Peters