[Nitro] What do you think.
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"
> <n:render href='meta'/>
> <n:render href='menu' />
>> example, if my template is not well-formed XML, does anything in Nitro
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