Re: [Zope-dev] PROPOSAL: html_quote implicit in entity-reference var tag syntax syntax
Evan Simpson wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
I propose that:
&dtml-name;
should be equivalent to:
<dtml-var name html_quote>
Can anyone think of a case where you need the entity-reference syntax and wouldn't want html_quote?
I had entirely forgotten that syntax. The only time you would want your text unquoted (in HTML, anyway) is if you're constructing tags or parts of tags, in which case <dtml-var> should be a good substitute.
With this change, I might actually *use* &dtml-name; instead of forgetting it.
Or, we can create a new sintax like: &dtml-name#html_quote; equivalent to: <!--#var name html_quote--> this can be useful to others formations as: &dtml-name#lower; &dtml-name#captalize; etc... Is this insane or a good idea? -- --------------------- Mauricio Souza Lima Hiperlógica mauricio@hiper.com.br ---------------------
Mauricio wrote:
Evan Simpson wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
I propose that:
&dtml-name;
should be equivalent to:
<dtml-var name html_quote>
Can anyone think of a case where you need the entity-reference syntax and wouldn't want html_quote?
I had entirely forgotten that syntax. The only time you would want your text unquoted (in HTML, anyway) is if you're constructing tags or parts of tags, in which case <dtml-var> should be a good substitute.
With this change, I might actually *use* &dtml-name; instead of forgetting it.
Or, we can create a new sintax like: &dtml-name#html_quote; equivalent to: <!--#var name html_quote-->
this can be useful to others formations as:
&dtml-name#lower; &dtml-name#captalize; etc...
Is this insane or a good idea?
I considered this, however, one of the goals of the entity-reference syntax was to conform to the SGML/HTML/XML syntax for entity references. I don't think that '#' is valid in an entity reference. Further, I don't think you could identify a delimiter character that is valid in an entity reference and that is not likely to occur in a name. Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:jim@digicool.com Python Powered! Technical Director (888) 344-4332 http://www.python.org Digital Creations http://www.digicool.com http://www.zope.org Under US Code Title 47, Sec.227(b)(1)(C), Sec.227(a)(2)(B) This email address may not be added to any commercial mail list with out my permission. Violation of my privacy with advertising or SPAM will result in a suit for a MINIMUM of $500 damages/incident, $1500 for repeats.
Jim Fulton wrote:
Mauricio wrote:
Evan Simpson wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
I propose that:
&dtml-name;
should be equivalent to:
<dtml-var name html_quote>
Can anyone think of a case where you need the entity-reference syntax and wouldn't want html_quote?
I had entirely forgotten that syntax. The only time you would want your text unquoted (in HTML, anyway) is if you're constructing tags or parts of tags, in which case <dtml-var> should be a good substitute.
With this change, I might actually *use* &dtml-name; instead of forgetting it.
Or, we can create a new sintax like: &dtml-name#html_quote; equivalent to: <!--#var name html_quote-->
this can be useful to others formations as:
&dtml-name#lower; &dtml-name#captalize; etc...
Is this insane or a good idea?
I considered this, however, one of the goals of the entity-reference syntax was to conform to the SGML/HTML/XML syntax for entity references. I don't think that '#' is valid in an entity reference. Further, I don't think you could identify a delimiter character that is valid in an entity reference and that is not likely to occur in a name.
hmmm, then i propose that this syntax should be used just to quick var entries in the document like outputting the section title: &dtml-document_title; And in this circumstances, auto html quoting should be very useful. -- Mauricio Souza Lima <mauricio@hiper.com.br> Hiperlógica <http://hiper.com.br> Automação de web sites | Web site automation São Paulo | Brasil | Fone: +55-11-251-4894
Jim Fulton wrote:
Mauricio wrote:
Evan Simpson wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
I propose that:
&dtml-name;
should be equivalent to:
<dtml-var name html_quote>
Can anyone think of a case where you need the entity-reference syntax and wouldn't want html_quote?
I had entirely forgotten that syntax. The only time you would want your text unquoted (in HTML, anyway) is if you're constructing tags or parts of tags, in which case <dtml-var> should be a good substitute.
With this change, I might actually *use* &dtml-name; instead of forgetting it.
Or, we can create a new sintax like: &dtml-name#html_quote; equivalent to: <!--#var name html_quote-->
this can be useful to others formations as:
&dtml-name#lower; &dtml-name#captalize; etc...
Is this insane or a good idea?
I considered this, however, one of the goals of the entity-reference syntax was to conform to the SGML/HTML/XML syntax for entity references. I don't think that '#' is valid in an entity reference. Further, I don't think you could identify a delimiter character that is valid in an entity reference and that is not likely to occur in a name.
Actually, you can come up with a delimiter of you put it on the other end, as in: &dtml.lower-name; &dtml.capitalize-name; I will probably include this in Zope 2.1. This is *needed* for URLs, as in: <a href="&dtml.url_quote-name;"> When you use a dot, then you won't get html_quote unless you ask for it. You'll also be able to combine things: &dtml.lower.html_quote-name; The default will be to use html_quote, so (in the coming beta 6 release): &dtml-name; is equivalent to <dtml-var name html_quote> Jim -- Jim Fulton mailto:jim@digicool.com Python Powered! Technical Director (888) 344-4332 http://www.python.org Digital Creations http://www.digicool.com http://www.zope.org Under US Code Title 47, Sec.227(b)(1)(C), Sec.227(a)(2)(B) This email address may not be added to any commercial mail list with out my permission. Violation of my privacy with advertising or SPAM will result in a suit for a MINIMUM of $500 damages/incident, $1500 for repeats.
So, '&dtml-x;' == '&dtml.html_quote-x;' == '<dtml-var x html_quote>' and '&dtml.a.b.c-x;' == '<dtml-var x a b c>'? Yay! I like this a lot. Suppose you could make a patch we could use for 2.0 while you're at it? <wink>
participants (3)
-
Evan Simpson -
Jim Fulton -
Mauricio