We don't bite newbies here... much | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
Hello princepawn,
Thank you for your fast and detailed answer. The poor support level of MxScreen is a pity. I haven't looked at it in detail, but I like the idea of recorded fields (with validation and storage). For my own framework I thought of a ddl (data definiton language) which models datatype, name, label, verification, storage and relation to other tables. So I might be able to "automatically" expand the main table with an 1:1, 1:n or n:m relationship to other tables. But back to the templating systems: I don't like the inline-approach. You should be able to change the html-pages without programming knowledge. Especially, tools such as Dreamweaver should cope with the tags. There might be problems with <...> tags, because sometimes they will be converted to '&_lt;' and so on. A few weeks ago you had a comparison on your home node about the different templating systems. When you compare HTML::Template and Template::Toolkit - which one is faster without using caching or precompiled pages? I don't need to much from the templates. Loops and IF-THEN-ELSE-constructs are all I need. Once again, thank you. I hope we can continue this discussion. Good bye, Uwe In reply to Re: Re: Web application frameworks / experience with CGI::MxScreen
by uwevoelker
|
|