[ZPT] Any reason this wouldn't work?

[Lynn Walton]

Evan Simpson wrote:

> Hmph.  I think this depends on what you mean by "content".  If you have
> hundreds of pages that have different layouts, with more complex
> structure than can be captured well with structured text, then I'd say
> that Page Templates are a fine solution.  After all, if you pull a chunk
> of complex HTML into some kind of content object, then plug it back into
> a master template, I don't see what has been gained.

Well, I guess maybe what's gained is someone non technical can start the page off with
the various static content, and not have to worry about getting the correct tal and
metal:use-macro calls to the master template. Then the techie can come in and add the
tal: or macro: stuff to get the dynamic stuff. In otherwords the use of the master
template containing the main look & feel, menu's, etc would be handled by the CMF
skins rather than someone having to start with a blank zpt and make the correct tal &
metal stuff at the top to pull in the master template.


> > since the ZPT's wouldn't be part of the portal catalog ( unless someone tells me
> > I can make them be part ... I'm still very fuzzy on the cataloging.).   So it
> > seemed to me that what I needed was a CMF object that had page template
> > abilities
>
> You want ZPTs that participate in the portal_catalog, yes?  Given that
> you're using the CMF, it's probably sufficient to make a filesystem
> class that mixes ZopePageTemplate with PortalContent (ZPT first!).  I
> wouldn't bother with a ZClass; skins give you the best part of those
> without the headaches.

So I assume this filesystem class you're talking about wouldn't be a CMF object?

Lynn