>
> Now if you're referring specifically to using custom tag shortcuts,
> then I agree more, because it's really easy to accidentally not
> register a shortcut in an app and it just quietly fails. But then,
> I'm also not sharing code all that often except when I'm writing
> for PW itself, in which case I use the common syntax.
What would be cool is if the wolips preferences for defining inline
bindings could be made to manage a configuration file/userdict
somewhere appropriate that WOOgnl can look to for define additional
tag shortcuts for a framework/application. Then you don't need to
define shortcut tags in two places, and you can reuse components in
other woognl enabled apps without getting bitten by missing shortcuts.
> What I WOULD say is that the more of these low level features you
> adopt, the more you tie yourself to Project Wonder and the further
> you deviate from Apple's released plan. If Apple decides to update
> the core frameworks and replace template parsing with something
> fancier, you are potentially left with whatever features we choose
> to add to template parsing vs what Apple adds because we have
> replaced the template parser. But this is also sort of true of
> Project Wonder in lots of places, too.
Apple would have to come up with something bloody brilliant to make
me not want to use WOOgnl anymore, but if they somehow managed to
then that can only be a good thing.
-- Seeya...QQuinton Dolan - qdola..mail.com Gold Coast, QLD, Australia Ph: +61 419 729 806
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon May 14 2007 - 18:39:28 EDT