From: Paul Everitt [mailto:Paul@digicool.com] Sent: 6. august 1999 18:15 To: Zope Mailing List (E-mail) Subject: RE: [Zope] The new DTML syntax

Alexander wrote:

...

natural languages, "dtml-if" isn't a word; it's two words; we learn, by convention, to split such hyphenated constructs into separate words. Our mind works best with individual words. Why go against the grain and teach the brain a new thing?

Unfortunately you're going against the grain of HTML on this one. From the W3C statement on XHTML, which is the declared future for HTML:

[snip]

Thus, polluting the HTML namespace with custom DTML tags is against the grain. The prepended "dtml-" imitates the XHTML mechanism of specifying namespaces.

Erhm. You _are_ polluting the HTML namespace, Paul. The "dtml-" prefix is in no way XML-compliant. It isn't even "almost" compliant. Just adding a hyphen does not make it cleaner.

Please feel free to explain to the W3C that their concept of modularization goes against the way the brain works, and that one big global namespace is the right thing to do.

I happen to agree with the W3C, although I concede that the "only one namespace at a time" rule isn't particularly good on the fingertips. It means that -- at least, if I got this right -- once we go for XML namespaces to distinguish DTML elements, we'll either be using a dtml: prefix or an html: prefix, depending on much typing we'll be inclined to do. Either that, or specifying the whole namespace URI for every tag. (Not bloody likely.)

...

I'm not surprised that DC dominates the negatively-charged end of the

Please explain the "not surprised". Do you feel in some way that we've followed a pattern of being closed-minded?

With all respect, I wasn't talking about closed-mindedness, rather about conservativeness, and Christopher's Petrilli comment about it being too late to make any changes. As Jeff Bauer points out, even open-source development isn't really democratic.

Do others in the community feel that we've been stifling input?

(Note that I didn't say you were stifling input. There's a huge difference between stifling input, and ignoring it. ;) [...]

In summary, you've brought up a number of interesting and valid points, as have many others in this thread on both sides of the argument. Sound judgement is the art of sorting through both the reasoned as well as the confrontational arguments and making the best decision.

Define "confrontational arguments". :)

--Paul

Paul Everitt Digital Creations paul@digicool.com 540.371.6909 ----------------------------------------- The Open Source Zope application server http://www.zope.org/

-- Alexander Staubo http://www.mop.no/~alex/ "Elvis skipped around the car and threw open the trunk. 'Hoopla!' he was heard to say, 'This is a 7.62mm M134 General Electric Minigun. Up to 6,000 rounds per minute. 7.62mm X 51 shells. 1.36kg recoil adaptors. Six muzzle velocity of 869m/s.' 'Oh,' said Rex, 'So that's what it is.'" --Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us: Armageddon 2: The B-Movie_