Templating systems (WAS: Re: [Catalyst] Catalyst::Model::CDBI)

Michele Beltrame mb at italpro.net
Thu Oct 6 19:18:43 CEST 2005


> the lack I see in both is the syntax, which I belive petal and it's  
> ancestors have a better approach, making it part of the xhtml- 
> structure, and as such making dummies etc much easier to create, and  
> also to use existing tools. Had I chosen again, and hat petal been  more 
> "complete", I might have chosen petal, but for now I'm sticking  with TT.

I've been using several toolkits in my web programming experience, 
ranging from HTML::Template to Petal to TT2 and others.

At present time I mostly use TT2 since it's the more complete out there, 
but the best experience I has was with Petal, and by far. When you work 
with web designers (who use DreamWeaver mostly) it's difficult to make 
templates which they can change just by learning a few things, but Petal 
makes it possible. Problem is it lacks many features (such as decent 
handling of conditions without using external plugins), and that 
development is a quite still at present time since the main maintainer 
changed work.

Just my 2 Euro cents, anyhow.


Michele Beltrame
ICQ# 76660101
Informativa privacy: http://www.italpro.net/em.html

More information about the Catalyst mailing list