[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re[2]: Frameworks integration
From: |
Manuel Guesdon |
Subject: |
Re[2]: Frameworks integration |
Date: |
Sun, 29 Feb 2004 12:36:46 +0100 (CET) |
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 22:23:52 +0100 Helge Hess <helge.hess@opengroupware.org>
wrote:
>| On 28.02.2004, at 06:21, S.J.Chun wrote:
>| > At least, GNUstepWeb and SOPE has each merits: GNUstepWeb is much more
>| > compatible with WebObjects in terms of EOF, and SOPE is known for its
>| > more mature state. :-)
>|
>| No, not really.
>|
>| First: EOF is a completely separate issue, of course you could also
>| use GDL2 with SOPE and this isn't part of gnustep-web.
EOF is part of WO. And most WO users won't use a wo 'clone' without it.
>| Second: I think NGObjWeb is more compatible with WebObjects than
>| gnustep-web (eg concerning template parsing, though we have stripped
>| out some stuff for OGo [but could put back things like "WEBOBJECT"
>| instead of "#" or .woo files in case someone actually cares <I guess
>| not>]).
Concerning template parsing in GNUstepWeb, it's open, just write another
template parser
and plugin it. There's already ANTLR one and html/xml one and you can choose
even
component by component which one to use.
Manuel
--
______________________________________________________________________
Manuel Guesdon - ORANGE CONCEPT <mguesdon@orange-concept.com>
14 rue Jean-Baptiste Clement - 93200 Saint-Denis - France
Tel: +33 1 4940 0997 - Fax: +33 1 4940 0998
- Re[2]: Frameworks integration, (continued)
- Re[2]: Frameworks integration, Manuel Guesdon, 2004/02/28
- Re: Frameworks integration, nicolas, 2004/02/28
- Re: Frameworks integration, Helge Hess, 2004/02/28
- Re: Frameworks integration, Quentin Mathé, 2004/02/28
- Re: Frameworks integration, Adam Fedor, 2004/02/28
Re: Frameworks integration, Brent Fulgham, 2004/02/27
Re: Frameworks integration, S.J.Chun, 2004/02/28