Re: Newbie Question: Are HTML attributes always stripped for tables?

Hi,

> Embedding directives in the HTML page makes it hard to read, but more
> importantly also assumes ownership of the class attribute. How does that
> work with pages using CSS? Keeping the directives in a separate file

Its no problem - barracuda leaves directives alone - it only cares about its 
own, and removes these. So class="Dir::Get_Data.Model.Key fooBar" ends up 
beeing class="fooBar"

And you can even move away from the class attribute itself. You  can use the 
id-attribute, and when using xhtml you should even be able to use something 
like bar:directive="...", so you can take advantage of namespaces here.

> certainly is a workable solution, but it as I see it, the downside is that
> it increases the complexity of my project (because I now have one more file
> per HTML page to update and keep in sync.)

I agree - and I personally didn't use them.

> Each to his own, I guess, but to me it would have been much more useful if
> the components respected the formatting used in the HTML and provided a
> closer approximation to a direct use of XMLC. Who knows, perhaps both
> approaches can co-exist?

Sureley the can - they don't interfere. Its just that _I_ won't put any effort 
into it :) 

> As I said, I'll take the template approach for a spin, but flexible as it
> may be, I don't find it nearly as attractive as having smarter components.

Well, I already expressed my opinion here - I agree that flexible components 
might be a nice thing. However, making them flexibile by configuring them 
using the dom they are bound to strikes me a too complicated task - after 
all, html-dom is not about beeing used as source of configuration.

Maybe a better approach would be to allow barracuda to have layout-aspects 
somehow attached to its components. But as said before - we went 
exceptionally well with BTemplate, so there is no personal need to do this.

Regards,

Diez