[Nitro] What do you think.
dan at zeraweb.com
Tue Apr 5 16:37:41 EDT 2005
My two cents inline below ...
On Apr 5, 2005, at 9:21 AM, George Moschovitis wrote:
> - change Nitro namespace from N to Nitro (to follow the ruby way)
> - change Glue namespace from N to Glue (to follow the ruby way)
> The Nitro namespace will by default include the Glue/Og namespaces.
this is all goodness, but i have one comment. is it possible (and i
think it is, i just don't recall quite how) to alias the namespaces to
N, G, and O? then you could have something like Include
NitroShortNamespaces or something. after all, nitro is a fairly
significant framework, and it *is* kind of nice to be able to say
N::FooBar. it isn't like this is a little utility or something ... =)
> The .xhtml extension will be changed to .rx (ruby xml/xhtml) or .sx
> (server xml/xhtml)
> Which one do you prefer?
i am all for sx and sxi (or, if that is used, isx). for one thing,
there is no reason the templating needs to be tightly coupled to ruby.
sure, if you embed code, it will be ruby code, but that could vary with
the platform. in addition, embedded ruby solutions (like JRuby) could
still use it anyway, even though the apps are not ruby apps. i think it
is more important to shoot for a good templating solution, and the
ruby-ness of it is secondary. the reality is that we have to take it
one step at a time, but to the extent that the naming should reflect
the underlying philosophy behind the design, i would say sx. plus, it's
> I 'll also add an .rxi or .sxi extension for includable templates.
> Those templates will not be allowed to be accessed as top level
> templates (for extra security).
this is a very good idea.
More information about the Nitro-general