Thread: [htmltmpl] Question about syntax
Brought to you by:
samtregar
From: Brad C. <bra...@hi...> - 2004-08-11 13:26:48
|
I've been using H::T for about a year have noticed variations in syntax. Fo= r example: <tmpl_var name=3D"somename"> vs. <tmpl_var name=3Dsomename> (no quotes) vs. <!-- <tmpl_var name=3Dsomename> --> and finally: <tmpl_var somename> (drop 'name=3D') I like the last one=8Bshort and simple. Pros and cons, especially in my last example. Thanks. |
From: Michael P. <mi...@pe...> - 2004-08-11 14:03:27
|
Brad Cathey wrote: > I've been using H::T for about a year have noticed variations in syntax. For > example: > > <tmpl_var name="somename"> This fit's better as HTML/XHTML since it has a tag name and the attribute it quoted. Probably the best if you are planning on using other advance attributes of the tag (like ESCAPE, etc). > <tmpl_var name=somename> (no quotes) This is easier since you don't have to type the quotes. But if the rest of your template is XHTML this would standout > <!-- <tmpl_var name=somename> --> This works well if you are using an (X)HTML editor that specifically recognized HTML and nothing else. This will just tell it to skip over you TMPL_VAR tags. Would also be better if you put your templates through some kind of validation before using them. > <tmpl_var somename> (drop 'name=') I like it too cause it's simple and easy, but it definitely would stand out in an (X)HTML editor and may even cause problems (depending on you editor). There isn't really a difference in which one you use (unless you are using other attributes besides name). Mainly just choices of style and just making you editor happy. -- Michael Peters Developer Plus Three, LP |
From: Dale W. H. <dal...@in...> - 2004-08-11 14:52:48
|
Are these two items equivalent? <!-- <tmpl_var name=3Dsomename> --> <!-- tmpl_var name=3Dsomename --> Thanks, Dale ----- Original Message -----=20 From: "Michael Peters" <mi...@pe...> To: <htm...@li...> Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 7:04 AM Subject: Re: [htmltmpl] Question about syntax Brad Cathey wrote: > I've been using H::T for about a year have noticed variations in = syntax. For > example: >=20 > <tmpl_var name=3D"somename"> This fit's better as HTML/XHTML since it has a tag name and the=20 attribute it quoted. Probably the best if you are planning on=20 using other advance attributes of the tag (like ESCAPE, etc). > <tmpl_var name=3Dsomename> (no quotes) This is easier since you don't have to type the quotes. But if=20 the rest of your template is XHTML this would standout > <!-- <tmpl_var name=3Dsomename> --> This works well if you are using an (X)HTML editor that=20 specifically recognized HTML and nothing else. This will just=20 tell it to skip over you TMPL_VAR tags. Would also be better if=20 you put your templates through some kind of validation before=20 using them. > <tmpl_var somename> (drop 'name=3D') I like it too cause it's simple and easy, but it definitely would=20 stand out in an (X)HTML editor and may even cause problems=20 (depending on you editor). There isn't really a difference in which one you use (unless you=20 are using other attributes besides name). Mainly just choices of=20 style and just making you editor happy. --=20 Michael Peters Developer Plus Three, LP ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by Shop4tech.com-Lowest price on Blank Media 100pk Sonic DVD-R 4x for only $29 -100pk Sonic DVD+R for only $33 Save 50% off Retail on Ink & Toner - Free Shipping and Free Gift. http://www.shop4tech.com/z/Inkjet_Cartridges/9_108_r285 _______________________________________________ Html-template-users mailing list Htm...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/html-template-users |
From: Michael P. <mi...@pe...> - 2004-08-11 15:03:47
|
Dale W. Hanzelka wrote: > Are these two items equivalent? > > <!-- <tmpl_var name=somename> --> > > <!-- tmpl_var name=somename --> > > Brad Cathey wrote: >><!-- <tmpl_var name=somename> --> No. Sorry about the confusion. the first one will put the contents of the var into an HTML comment and will never be seen by the view. The second one will hide the H::T tag from a validator/editor. The second is what Brad and I meant (I think) -- Michael Peters Developer Plus Three, LP |
From: Chisel W. <ch...@he...> - 2004-08-11 14:13:21
|
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 08:26:39AM -0500, Brad Cathey wrote: > I've been using H::T for about a year have noticed variations in syntax. For > example: > > <tmpl_var name="somename"> > > vs. > > <tmpl_var name=somename> (no quotes) > > vs. > > <!-- <tmpl_var name=somename> --> > > and finally: > > <tmpl_var somename> (drop 'name=') > > I like the last oneshort and simple. Pros and cons, especially in my last > example. Initially I was a strict comments-only syntax user. Over the years I've changed my view a little. I now use comments-only syntax everywhere *except* inside tag attributes, e.g.: <img src="<TMPL_VAR myimage>"> as opposed to <img src="<!-- TMPL_VAR NAME="myimage" -->"> which screws up syntax higlighting to the Nth degree. I could probably use: <img src="<!-- TMPL_VAR myimage -->"> or <img src="<!-- TMPL_VAR NAME=myimage -->"> But I figure that when I'm inside an attribute I need to remove as much 'fluff' as possible to keep it legible. Using the comment syntax elsewhere means that it shows up clearly in vim, rather than just blending in (and should pass any HTML validation too) Just my tuppence, Chisel -- e: ch...@he... | If you play a Windows XP installation w: http://www.herlpacker.co.uk/ | CDROM backwards, you hear a message gpg: D167E7FE | from Satan. Even worse... if you play | it forwards, it installs Windows XP. |
From: Markus S. <m.s...@gm...> - 2004-08-11 16:06:02
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Chisel Wright wrote: | | <img src="<!-- TMPL_VAR myimage -->"> | or | <img src="<!-- TMPL_VAR NAME=myimage -->"> | | But I figure that when I'm inside an attribute I need to remove as much | 'fluff' as possible to keep it legible. That's where I use vanguard_compatibility_mode => 1 during load_tmpl - it's %myimage% syntax is unsurpassed short, but of course misses the possibility to decide about escaping... Markus -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBGkIVxxUzQSse11ARAuIrAJ9peySfX4XRyhHrk0uRDVJ/x4/fzgCfdsU8 V+58ahPy4NePqO9gBSylLFU= =hj8c -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
From: Chisel W. <ch...@he...> - 2004-08-11 16:03:47
|
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 05:58:13PM +0200, Markus Spring wrote: > That's where I use vanguard_compatibility_mode => 1 during load_tmpl - it's > %myimage% syntax is unsurpassed short, but of course misses the possibility to > decide about escaping... Our HTML bunnies seem to struggle enough with stuff that looks like HTML - not sure we can risk scaring them with % symbols yet!! "Yeah guys, you should use <!-- -->, but you can use < >, or if you like you can use % % too" /me fears -- e: ch...@he... | Laughter is the best medicine. Find a w: http://www.herlpacker.co.uk/ | person much poorer than you and gpg: D167E7FE | laugh at them. |
From: Pete P. <pet...@cy...> - 2004-08-11 19:26:26
|
Chisel Wright wrote: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 08:26:39AM -0500, Brad Cathey wrote: > >> >><!-- tmpl_var name=somename --> >> > Initially I was a strict comments-only syntax user. Over the years I've > changed my view a little. > > I now use comments-only syntax everywhere *except* inside tag > attributes, e.g.: > > <img src="<TMPL_VAR myimage>"> > > as opposed to > > <img src="<!-- TMPL_VAR NAME="myimage" -->"> > > which screws up syntax higlighting to the Nth degree. > > I could probably use: > > <img src="<!-- TMPL_VAR myimage -->"> > or > <img src="<!-- TMPL_VAR NAME=myimage -->"> > > But I figure that when I'm inside an attribute I need to remove as much > 'fluff' as possible to keep it legible. > > Using the comment syntax elsewhere means that it shows up clearly in > vim, rather than just blending in (and should pass any HTML validation > too) I'm in the <!-- comment --> camp as well. I use jEdit and created an edit mode for HTML::Template so that it sees comments with 'tmpl_' and applies a style to it to make in stand out. I can also run templates through Tidy or a validator if necessary. (It's not, I write perfekt coad evereytime! ;) Pete |