On Sun, 2009-05-24 at 21:26 +0100, Stuart wrote: > 2009/5/24 Nathan Rixham <nrixham@xxxxxxxxx>: > > LinuxManMikeC wrote: > >> > >> On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 11:09 AM, tedd <tedd.sperling@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > >>> At 12:01 AM +0100 5/24/09, Nathan Rixham wrote: > >>>> > >>>> LinuxManMikeC wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> I was recently researching template engines for a small in-house > >>>>> project, with a bias toward simple and lightweight. I found this > >>>>> interesting article in my search. I think its worth considering if > >>>>> you don't need all the bells and whistles of the big template engines. > >>>>> Simple and elegant. > >>>>> http://www.massassi.com/php/articles/template_engines/ > >>>> > >>>> cheers, it certainly is simple and elegant - however a bit too simple > >>>> (specifically as it's in template php); gives me immediate visions of a > >>>> wordpress template - and that's more than enough to scare me off! <lol> > >>>> > >>>> regards, > >>>> > >>>> nathan > >>> > >>> All: > >>> > >>> Anytime I see embedded style elements within html, that's more than ample > >>> warning to make me look elsewhere for the solution -- because IMO that's > >>> not > >>> a solution. > >>> > >>> I find it interesting that the articles states "the separation of > >>> business > >>> logic from presentation" but then combines content with presentation. I > >>> don't see any real gain here. > >>> > >>> My efforts are always trying to separate content from function and > >>> presentation. Make everything as unobtrusive as you can. Place styling in > >>> remote css, client-side javascript enhancements unobtrusively, and use > >>> server-side php/mysql to create secure and accurate function to generate > >>> the > >>> proper html and deliver desired content. I can understand someone wanting > >>> to > >>> simplify their work, but exchanging one problem for another doesn't cut > >>> it > >>> for me. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> > >>> tedd > >>> > >>> > >> > >> You're missing the point just because he threw in some old HTML > >> styling attributes. The main issue is the overhead of added parsing > >> layers to find where content goes in the HTML. Aren't we already > >> using a language (PHP) that parses for place holders for dynamic > >> content within HTML tags? Write the template in XHTML, style it with > >> CSS, and insert content place marks with PHP short tags. Do the > >> programming work of calculations, validation, and DB access in another > >> script which will include the template at the appropriate time. Even > >> create classes to hold various data sets (think JavaBeans) if you > >> want. Adding a layer of abstraction just so your designers don't have > >> to write <?=$var?> is silly at best. At lest that's my opinion. Do > >> whatever works for you. > >> > >> Mike > > > > which is lovely, but then you realise you have business logic tied up in the > > presentation layer, and the client suddenly wants 3 different web based > > interfaces and a roaming flash version which calls the system via an api; > > and then you have the joy of telling the client its 6 months work and huge > > figure to rewrite the application layer to included an abstracted > > presentation layer, but it could have been avoided months ago with a days > > worth of work (or even an hours worth) and a different decision. > > Using PHP for templates has absolutely no bearing on whether your > presentation is tied up with your logic or they are completely > separate. Almost every project I work on day-to-day has at least 2 > front ends, XHTML and an API. In addition several have mobile versions > of the presentation layer. All of them use pure PHP to render output. > > > all in though, hardly matters on a personal site, or a quick client job > > where, or a.. I guess there's a place for each technology and method; and we > > could throw scenarios around all night getting no where. > > IMHO there is only one scenario where using a template engine is > justified and that's when you're working with people who insist on > using it and you can't talk them round. The inverse can just as easily be argued. I've given good points before as to why a template engine can be useful, good points with no rebuff. Good points where PHP includes cannot compete. I'm not going to bother re-hashing them, since you only remember what you want to remember, similarly you only use what you want to use (and this applies to the PHP IS-A templating language dogma). I use both system where the case presents itself. In fact, I even have templates that create PHP files that use require(). Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
