On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 05:37:41PM +0100, Jean-Michel Hiver wrote: > On Tue 30-Jul-2002 at 05:10:57PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 06:01:36PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: > > > I think Template::Petal will work just fine. XML::Template I do > > > not like, "XML::" is quickly becoming is as information-free as "Sys::"" > > > > Agreed. > > Well, except that it's really what it's meant to be doing, processing > XML files... RSS, SVG, XHTML, VoiceXML, you name it.
As the years go by more and more modules will be "processing XML files". Putting them all under XML::* just isn't scalable. We're trying to keep the XML::: namespace to only *very* low-level stuff now. > HTML has been added because it's convenient (unfortunately not everyone > uses XHTML), but all the module does is merely using TreeBuilder to fire > XML events by traversing the HTML parsed tree... > > Take a look at examples in the documentation to check it out by > yourself. You can also check the mailing list archive: > > http://lists.webarch.co.uk/pipermail/petal/ > > If everyone agrees that this module is primarily a templating system > rather than an XML tool, fine. I'll be glad to remove the HTML > functionality and make it process stricly XML files if that makes more > sense. Since "Template Attribute Language" has a formal spec http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/ZPT/TAL%20Specification%201.4 and perhaps multiple implementations, http://lists.webarch.co.uk/pipermail/petal/2002-July/000016.html how about: TAL::Petal Then any other TAL related modules have a natural home. Tim.
