Re: Template Proposal

Martin Jansen wrote: > > On Fri, 13 Jul 2001 11:18:17 -0700 (PDT), Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > > >As far as I am concerned, Andrei's Smarty templating system is far > >superior to either of these and if we are going to standardize on one, I > >would say Smarty would be it. > > I don't think that standardizing on one specific template system > is a good idea: Some people may only want to replace some > placeholders in a single template file with some values coming > from a database. For doing that they normally don't need all the > features that are included in Smarty. The functional range of > e.g. IT[X] is just enough for them. I really agree with you Martin. Smarty is marvellouse, stainless steel and high quality, but for example in most of my work only need split code from design as easy as posible, without the need of functions, configurations or set write perms somewhere in the document root. I have nothing against IT (although I think Xtpl and it use the same tags), the only thing I'm against is that it will be there with bugs and without doc. If anybody wants to do a little maintain of it, my proposal will still to replace it. > > I vote for allowing more than one templating system in PEAR. > +2 (if you let me raise the two hands ;) Tomas V.V.Cox