[Product-Developers] Re: Where does it hurt?
david.bain at alteroo.com
Tue May 20 02:34:59 UTC 2008
The skin layer/directory resources vs browser views/resources is an
interesting issue. There are a few products (CSSManager comes to mind) that
build on the skin layer and dtml based stylesheet way of doing skinning.
Skins that don't do the "DTML thing", lose the benefit of these products. In
Plone OOTB theme project (
http://www.openplans.org/projects/ootb-plone-themes/), the consensus has
been that we should be sensitive to this and include dtml based css files,
preferably in skin layers.
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Martin Aspeli <optilude at gmx.net> wrote:
> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>> Previously Martin Aspeli wrote:
>>> Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>>> Right now we have one solution: skin layers. Until the new stuff is used
>>>> that is what people should be using. Consistent, flexible, and well
>>> For the record, I disagree with this (and so does my book).
>>> I think browse views are vastly superior to skin layer templates, because
>>> they give you a sensible place to put view logic. Last I checked, they do
>>> cache in CacheFu as well.
>> Browser views do cache. Browser resources do not.
> True that. I wonder how hard it'd be to fix, since we fixed it for views?
> Style sheets and images don't, and people may prefer skin layers.
>> Style sheets often want DTML, which is not supported in browser
> Indeed. Although DTML there is fairly nasty anyway. :)
> Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who
> want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book
> Product-Developers mailing list
> Product-Developers at lists.plone.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Product-Developers