Re: Template Proposal

> At 08:25 PM 11/8/01 +0100, Alexander Wagner wrote: >> IMHO, Smarty is perfect if you only want to separate Code from Design >> and don't want to touch XSLT. It has a damn lot of nice features and is >> quite fast. Besides, it is well documented. >> But if you want the templates to be edited by third-party designers, >> and I mean designers, not developers, you're usually better off with >> IT[X] or similar systems that don't place control structures in the >> templates. As long as you can live with the performance hit, anyway. > > I'm afraid I have to agree... I love the concept of Smarty, and it's fine > for designers with some programming experience, but if they only use > Photoshop/Golive or Fireworks/Dreamweaver then they don't understand it... > it seems to be the {section} bits which cause the most confusion - try > giving them a dynamically generated table to edit :-) speaking as a part designer.... time to hire some new designers. if they can't learn smarty blocks they should go to the hospital. :) we are really not talking about complex concepts here, keys, loops, and blocks... > There again, you cannot dynamically generate a table using other template > engines, so it's not really a criticism of Smarty - whichever way you > generated the table they'd still have a job changing its look in > Dreamweaver (let alone FrontPage)... that is true. but they should be hand-coding their html anyway.. I use dreamweaver for prototypes but would never put such dog-ugly code in production. egh. /opinion-rant. :) > Peter. > > -- > Maple Design > http://www.mapledesign.co.uk > >