>> pdontthink@... said:
>> This is the basis for the templating engine I'm testing out with the n=
> Good. Is that just coincidence? I am thinking about using it for a
> project I am just starting, so I'll take a look at what you've done for
> the website templating. Has it been all you ever wanted? Have there b=
> any problems with it?
The only trouble I've noticed is that his engine supports nested template=
- which is nice, allows you to separate header/footer from middle content
that changes more frequently. Also, for the doc site, I didn't think the
caching something to pursue, and given how dynamic links, etc are on our
site, wasn't sure how necessary it was anyway, as many areas can't be
Nested templates poses no trouble in how he's implemented it, I only
thought it might cause some trouble for those wanting to move to SMARTY -
however, I think the vars can be successfully nested (i.e. make another
nested array containing the info from the inner template) and the whole
can be delivered to smarty that way.. so it shouldn't be too big a deal.
Also am curious about a good way to specify template filenames...
seems like those are fairly arbitrary, and a case could be made that we
expect certain filenames to fulfil different roles, and all you need to
provide a new set of templates is to change the template directory... is
that reasonable? I'm not sure, but that would certainly be the easiest
otherwise, it's perfectly easy to use. the smdoc stuff is currently a mes=
(I readily admit), I've been going back and forth with the maintainer of
the framework, and am in the middle of adjusting to some additional
changes he's made as we dicker.. ;) There are quite a few changes, in
fact, that I haven't checked in yet (now that I'm looking), but the
template related files are alright: in CVS, the smdoc module, the templat=
class is in lib/smdoc.class.template.php, with particular overrides (for
setup customization), in config/config.display.php.
You're welcome to have a peek.
'Waste of a good apple.' - Samwise Gamgee