[Zope] ZPT: ready for prime time?

[Geir Bækholt]

I have to agree on some points here. ;-)

I prefer ZPT to dtml now because of the much clearer namespaces and
html nesting , even though i never use WYSIWYG editors..
They work much better than DTML with text-editors too , as color
coding is correct , and they are compatible with HTML/XML tools , like
TIDY..

Une misunderstanding that should be cleared up , though , it that they
force you to write valid XHTML.. This idea seems to have been ditched
a while ago , and as of the current implementation , creating valid
XHTML documents (especially with forms) is almost impossible - because
of the way they handle single attributes , like 'selected' and
'checked' (which are not single at all in XHTML, but written
explicitly , like this : selected=3D"selected") .. This is not currently
supportd by ZPT..
:-(
- and dreamweaver f***s up valid XHTML totally, but perhaps GoLive can
fare better in this respect =3F


anyway , ZPT rule!  - with or without WYSIWYG editors!

--=20
Geir B=E6kholt                   web-developer/zopatista
geirh@funcom.com             funcom oslo | webdev-team

            <!-- PGPid : 0x90B47B20 -->




on or about, Friday, June 22, 2001, we have reason to believe that Peter Be=
ngtsson wrote something along the lines of :
PB> They can be used in a WYSIWYG editor fine. Much better than DTML can.

PB> The editing advantage of ZPT comes third on my list of importance of ZP=
T.
PB> 1) More clear. No mix of namespaces makes coding stricter and easier to
PB> maintain
PB> 2) Forces valid XHTML. With DTML you seldomly get a clear picture of yo=
ur
PB> <span> and <table> tags. In our environment the skill level varies grea=
tly
PB> and novice users tend to bombard it with invalid HTML and hence
PB> undisplayable in Opera or Netscape

PB> Peter