From: Raphael Bauduin <raphael.bauduin@...>
Date: 2004-07-26T22:31:51+09:00
Subject: Re: rubyonrails and cgikit comparison

David Heinemeier Hansson wrote:
>> Let me return the question: don't you think there a gain if the ruby 
>> and html coders are different persons? (One gain being that none can 
>> break the
>> other part's work, like mentioned in my previous mail)
> 
> 
> I think I have some perspective on this considering that Basecamp was 
> built using Rails with a separate HTML/design guy and separate 
> programmer. The way that we worked, the HTML-guy prepare a template with 
> just HTML.

I usually work the other way around: I make a first draft template, and the designer
enhance it. Maybe I should try your way as it lets the designer really do what he
 wants without any limitations set by my limited imagination in HTML layout! 
In fact, you've already proved it works....

> He then passed this template over to me where I could 
> sprinkle conditions, iterations, and insertions over it using eRuby 
> blocks. Many times, the code that needed to be in the template files 
> were too complicated, so that was split into helpers.
> 
> Now, when this sprinkling was done, I passed the template back to the 
> HTML guy. And considering that all the scriplets were pretty much 
> self-explanatory:
> 
>   <% for post in @posts %>
>     <%= post.title %>
>   <% end %>
> 
> and..
> 
>   <% if @person.authenticated? %>
>     Hi, Mr. <%= @person.name %>
>   <% end %>
> 

The more examples I see, the more I think it's very similar.
For example:

<cgikit name="AuthenticatedCond">
  Hi, Mr. <cgikit name="PersonName"/>
</cgikit>

I'm just more comfortable with no reference to internal code data in the template.
And as we work on a xml-like file, I'm not shocked by the fact that we work with tags.

Raph