[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Where we are going with 1.3
- Subject: Re: Where we are going with 1.3
- From: Charley Tiggs <..hidden..>
- Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 16:28:25 -0400
Chris Travers wrote:
1) There is some debate (so far, over IRC) over whether to move
templates into the database,
a) makes for easier security because we can have full ACL-based support
A couple of pros to add here:
1) backup. Backup your database back up your templates.
2) ability to use RESTful or other such interfaces to create your own
means of editing templates. This enables developers to create
simplified interfaces that allow their customers to edit/create
templates as needed.
I am not entirely sure why database storage is necessary for RESTful
access. I.e. RESTful defines how the client and web server
communicate, and that has nothing to do with how the web server
handles the request or where the data is stored.
Okay, I've just revealed that I have no idea what RESTful means. My
point is that, given that the templates are stored in the DB, I can
create my own interface using my language of choice to edit those
templates. If the templates are built in such a manner that it's fairly
easy to recognize variables, sections, etc, I can keep clients who are
not as technically savvy from making a mess of things but give them a
little more control than they would normally have. Of course, we could
do the same thing from the file system, but that means making sure
permissions are set on the files and folders involved.
3) portability. Want to move from one host to another, dump your db and
import on new host. No need to worry about moving template files.
Ok, I see that there are places where this might be an advantage. But
portability here does not equal cross-platform (i.e. the big issues
with EOLs etc still remain).
I didn't say it's perfect. You're not gonna be able to make it perfect
for everyone anyways.
4) one less resource on the file system where less technically savvy
folks installing Ledger will need to know how to set file permissions.
a) makes it harder to edit using a basic text editor.
I'm not sure this is a con. With all the interface changes you're
making to take advantage of more modern tech, perhaps consider including
one of the browser based WYSIWYG editors for this? I'm betting that
most users will only need to change basic stuff to meet their individual
needs so the need to use a basic text editor outside of a web browser
may not be all that important, depending on the target market. Just a
thought. For the more advanced users, it shouldn't be too hard to copy
over to an open window and copy back. No matter what you do, there's
going to be some copying involved if there's a remote server involved.
How do you propose to recommend editing LaTeX templates?
In the case of LaTeX templates, you provide a regular textarea. In
suggesting a web-based WYSIWYG editor, I was thinking of HTML templates.