[Laszlo-dev] Changing lzt=html to lzt=wrapper?

[Henry Minsky]

That sounds like a good idea. Unfortunately there are a lot of places in the
code and docs (and wrappers and solo deployer) that are going to be affected
by that change. Where's our new summer intern ? :-)



On 1/18/07, P T Withington <ptw at openlaszlo.org> wrote:
>
> I'd rather change lz(request)t(ype) to lzw(rapper).  Better yet,
> we've discussed a number of times trying to unify the lz? options,
> perhaps by saying something like:
>
>    ?lzoptions=runtime:dhtml,wrapper:html,debug:false,proxy:true
>
> [I don't know for a fact that that is or is not a legitimate URI
> query parameter syntax, or if : and , already have reserved meanings
> in query parameters.  Presumably we could come up with something
> along those lines.]
>
> Similarly, the litany of server requests that are lumped into the ?
> lzt argument should be split out as something like:
>
>    ?lzoptions=request:clear-cache
>
> etc.
>
> The biggest benefit is that we would remove a lot of pollution from
> the query arg space (especially the non-lz-prefixed args like
> profile, proxy, etc.).
>
> If `runtime:dhtml,wrapper:html` is still confusing, I suggest we
> change dhtml to ajax.
>
> On 2007-01-18, at 20:36 EST, David Temkin wrote:
>
> > With the addition of lzr=dhtml, lzt=html has become pretty confusing.
> >
> > Any thoughts on deprecating lzt=html in favor of lzt=wrapper, or
> > something along those lines?
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
Henry Minsky
Software Architect
hminsky at laszlosystems.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.openlaszlo.org/pipermail/laszlo-dev/attachments/20070118/652d7017/attachment.html