> > Since my environment also uses TT (our use of plugins and other features > would render any H::T implementation a mass of nasty filters), I do > approve of the idea of decoupling CGI::App and H::T. I'm also > interesting in CGI::Light, since I'm not doing any html generation from > CGI, but I seem to recall that it removed a bit too much... I'll check > again. > We have found lots of valid ways to implement advanced features (like plugins) in HTML::Template. These features have all been implemented (granted, some were suggested that we never tried) without damaging our careful separation of logic and presentation. I think many of the issues regarding complex functionality and HTML::Template are actually solved in the CGI::Application framework's design and the implementation of individual components (plugins, web-apps, ect). In addition to this, I am highly curious as to what makes CGI::Application 'coupled' to HTML::Template. I have been working with both for over a year now, but have been using HTML::Template most of the time. Just my $0.002 Cory Trese Lead Web Application Developer O'NEIL & ASSOCIATES, INC. 495 Byers Rd. Miamisburg, Ohio 45342-3662 Phone: (937) 865-0800 ext. 3038 Fax: (937) 865-5858 E-mail: suppressed --------------------------------------------------------------------- Web Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/suppressed/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: suppressed For additional commands, e-mail: suppressed
Mail converted by mhonarc 2.6.15
This archive provided courtesy of JSW4.NET, Internet Hosting Services for Small Business.