[Seaside] HTML method naming conventions

[Boris Popov]

I agree with Colin, we have abstracted html into a more readable and elegant Smalltalk syntax and it works great once you get into it, look for long term benefits, not immediate 1-to-1 comparisons. Having that said, there's no reason why someone couldn't just make a package of html-like accessors if they felt strongly about it, but then you are moving away from what the rest of the Seaside world had settled on.

Cheers!

-Boris (via BlackBerry)

----- Original Message -----
From: seaside-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org <seaside-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
To: Seaside - general discussion <seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Thu Apr 10 20:55:41 2008
Subject: Re: [Seaside] HTML method naming conventions


On 10-Apr-08, at 7:44 PM, Edward Stow wrote:

> + 1  I would prefer to use html tag names, td, tr, a.
>
> And seaside adds to the html language disconnect by using #url: for
> src and href attributes.

- 1

The most important consideration is readability. That's better served  
by fidelity to Smalltalk conventions than by fidelity to the HTML  
spec. A rendering method is Smalltalk code that generates HTML, not a  
template language. That's a good thing - rendering code can be  
refactored like any other Smalltalk code, and can thus generate  
complex interfaces that would be difficult or impossible with  
something that had more fidelity to HTML.

Colin
_______________________________________________
seaside mailing list
seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/seaside/attachments/20080410/99be6f19/attachment.htm