Re: [PATCH] cgi.rb -- more GET/POST stuff

[e-mail] wrote:
...
> 
> Let me respond to a few of James's comments.
> 
<snip/>

For what it's worth, using an invisible table for Web page layout is 
possible not a good example to use when defending hacks versus 
"brilliant discovery", as some may see it as tending more towards the 
former.  In any event, there is a broad range of things one can do to 
achieve certain results.  Maybe the real issue is whether a given tool 
offers sufficient means to achieve a goal, even if that means is not one 
everyone finds to be the easiest or the most familiar.

(On a side note, I never used the word "icky", nor referred to anyone as 
a rube, a dolt, or as wet behind the ears. Those are your words, not 
mine.  Sorry if I touched a raw nerve in my post.)

Most importantly, this is not the place to have a discussion on the pros 
and cons of different techniques for Web site development.  Obviously 
there is disagreement on the appropriate use of certain options, but 
none of this means much to core Ruby development.

I would prefer that any code in a Ruby Web lib adhere to any applicable 
specs and RFCs; how people chose to exploit what falls out of this is 
their business.  There are any number of ways to pass application 
parameters in a URL (see del.icio.us, for example, or rails), and given 
how trivial it is to extract the data I am skeptical of claims they 
belong in the core library.


James