- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 22:03:21 +0000
- To: public-webapps-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15454 --- Comment #3 from Thaddee TYL <thaddee.tyl@gmail.com> 2012-03-21 22:03:19 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > I disagree that templates should _have_ a substitution system, but I fully > support the idea that they should make applying a substitution system easy. 100% agreed. > Rather than try to force a 'one size fits all' model, I suggest it is more > worthwhile to provide a good model to define templates in the markup and a > useful pattern to plug an "applier" in. There are already numerous existing, > well established projects that do substitution on templates as strings and if > you look at how different they are in feature and philosophy - it seems > infinitely better to allow individual, established (and new upstart) vendors to > compete on that front. What seems certain for me is that such a substitution system should be hackable in JS, which means that it needs a JS api. The way I see this mechanism is a box (the component), which is ready to receive a certain JSON object. It applies the JSON object one item at a time, making each of the items fit in the patterns it defines, as if in a jigsaw puzzle. What should the template's interface we provide look like? Something like `render(Object model, any data)`? Should we specify the "applier" in the template, not in the renderer? What do you think? -- Configure bugmail: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2012 22:03:23 UTC