No. No. No. [banging head against the wall!] This is not an organizational problem. Requiring designers to know how to code functional instead of just presentational aspects. A large online-production organization requires specializations, and this leads to two types of designers or interface developers: 1 => Those with interest in stepping up to learn code - HTML folks learning coding via PHP, CF, ASP etc. - Show desire to use HTML coding as a launch pad to learn new skills programming 2 => Those with interest in refining their creative skills - Creative types, good at integrating multiple media using HTML as a glue-language - Good with HTML, CSS, Visual design, interactivity There is a 3rd class of folks doing templates and HTML documents: 3 => HTML-literate content specialists - Journalists - Online Creative Services writers - Online marketing specialists Of these 3 categories, suggesting an approach of using DTML as a heavier template to prevent stuffing all application functionality into a Python core application only works with the first group. ZPT is the only scalable solution for organizations with all 3 types of people, because it keeps things familiar and what is not familiar (i.e. tal attributes) is pretty unbreakable because it isn't generally touched. Generally speaking though, you want presentation designers to fall into category #2, and your company's staffing process should reflect that in a larger online production organization. I am not talking about people who can only code HTML through Dreamweaver, GoLive, etc... I mean the same thing you mean when talking about HTML people, but I don't expect them to be able to grasp functional development as well as it would/could be done in the logic layer or by developers/coders. The way to support this sort of organizational structure is to keep the presentation as light-weight in functional terms and capabilities as possible. ZPT achieves this, and forces the code to live in the logic layer (i.e. in my Python products and TTW glue scripts, some of which are DTML - but DTML is only used by coders, not HTML people). We use DTML for writing small widgets that are heavy in code but also heavy in presentation (this is similar to what Ausum suggests in his use of "pagelets," I think), but these widgets are written by programmers and not HTML folks. The big thing in a large organization is that you need not have the assumption that all (even really good) HTML people need to know how to code even a bit or logic, and this puts ZPT at the forefront for this use-case. And saying this is not a sign of organizational dysfunction, just staffing specializations needed to scale online production. Also, Terry, I think your message from Friday took my original message out of context. I didn't say that ZPT prevented communication, but that it eliminated the need for constant "get everyone involved" reintegration. You need to understand that this level of relative independence is needed because organizational efficiency is total crap without it. If the development people need to be consulted every time there is a minor look-and-feel redesign, they have no time to develop code or work on new projects. Anything I can do, I will do to keep technical staff from needing to consult designers just to keep things from breaking... Ideally, only when functionality changes with look and feel should the technical staff need to re-integrate the functional machinery into the otherwise visual templates. ZPT accels at this. Sean -----Original Message----- From: Terry Hancock [mailto:hancock@anansispaceworks.com] Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 12:47 PM To: zope@zope.org Subject: RE: [Zope] Re: Java re-invents DTML :-) On Sunday 23 February 2003 09:00 am, Fernando Martins wrote:

Maik Jablonski wrote:

...

 Stephan is not the only one... I like ZPT (great concept), but I still  prefer DTML too... Just another measurement error? ;)

Maybe you don't work with a designer(s) who barely understand html and you don't need to go back and forth between design and coding? Then, zpt might not be make a big difference?

Some people would consider that an organizational problem. Either pay for training, or get smarter designers. ;-D For my purposes, anyway, a designer who "barely understands HTML" is useless, anyway. As I mentioned, I don't think that form without function is worth pursuing. Anyway, we're more likely to have designers who've never seen a GUI page designer (or have and hate them). You know -- the kind of designers who try to make things look good in Internet Explorer, Mozilla, *and* w3m. [snip rest of comment]