[Nitro] What do you think.

George Moschovitis george.moschovitis at gmail.com
Tue Apr 5 15:52:18 EDT 2005

> 1. I tend to be against any names that presume to be Ruby-standard
> rather than app-standard or neutral.  So, either .sx or .nx (for Nitro XML)

i agree, I like .sx more 
> I like the idea of using spec-compliant templates, as it opens the door
> for validation the templates both before and after rendering.  it also
> You would end up with something like this:
> <html xmlns:n="http://nitro.rubyforge.org/2005/nitro"
>        xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
>   <head>
>     <n:render href='meta'/>
>   </head>
>   <body>
>    <n:render href='menu' />

>> example, if my template is not well-formed XML, does anything in Nitro
> break?

at the moment only if you use XSLT stylesheets (the parser expects a
valid xml file).

> .sxi is an extension used by OpenOffice Impress.

thanks for pointing this out.

> What difference does the extension name have on processing?  For
> example, if a template (foo.sx) references another file, bar.sx, does it
> handle it differently if the file were named bar.rxi or bar.txt?
> ... 
> Do you mean they cannot live under public/ ?

no i mean you can ONLY include .sxi templates in .sx templates. Ie if
you have a file named myaction.sxi you cannot acces it with
http://www.mysite.com/myaction. Only files with .sx extension will be
allowed by the dispatcher. .sxi files will be only included.



More information about the Nitro-general mailing list