Re: Re: [Webmacro-devel] Current directory metaphor for including templates

I think the problem is that WM is a framework that is designed to be 
useful in lots of different situations.  This makes is difficult to 
define what reasonable OOTB behavior should be.  The default template 
loading behavior has always been a bit of a pain point,  because tries 
to find templates in various places depending on your setup. 

Maybe the solution would be to package different sample configurations 
and document how to use them.  For example, if you will be loading 
templates from a single file system directory you could use one 
properties file, and if you always load your templates from 
<context-root>/WEB-INF/templates, you could use a different properties 
file.  We could also distribute sample apps that run OOTB using these 
configurations.

Keats

Tim Pizey wrote:

>On Wednesday 26 April 2006 18:12, Marcello H wrote:
>  
>
>>What Keats is suggesting, is exactly how I'm doing this.
>>    
>>
>Me too.
>
>  
>
>>But not for this specific case.
>>I do this because I've some includes in a specific directory related
>>from the root-dir of the application.
>>How can you handle your situaqtion if you want to move a main-template
>>to another directory, and a template that uses a shared include is
>>left in the old dir.
>>(I think you have to copy the include-stuff, because it's expected on
>>diverent locations.)
>>
>>Time to refrase your question , I guess......
>>    
>>
>
>Not sure if this is addressed to me. 
>
>The use case is the 'not using anything bespoke, not needing to learn 
>anything' scenario. 
>
>I believe that software is built upon metaphors, and that the all pervading 
>and intuitive metaphor of 'current directory' should be carried through 
>to template inclusion. 
>
>To illustrate this - how did I discover that this metaphor does not apply to 
>WebMacro?
>I tried a bald include, in the expectation that it would work, it didn't, I 
>had to investigate why not. 
>
>This is not user-friendly, webmacro should require no knowledge to use, 
>it should 'just work', ie  it should do what people expect. 
>
>I don't think Alex's objections are really germane here, as he is a 
>'power user' and I am talking about the casual or central case user. 
>
>I know this probably puts me in a minority of one, but I do not use 
>any of the configurable features of WM, deliberately. 
>
>I want WM to work intuitively out-of-the-box, 
>to do what it says on the tin, and not to get in the way. 
>
>I can continue with my context tool, but I had to write that, understand the 
>problem and bring the issue up on the developer's list. 
>The use case is not to have to do any of that. 
>
>cheers
>Tim
>
>  
>



-------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642