Currently i have a little website that outputs xhtml and wml. But the templates get their data from a Smarty object instead of an xml file.
As i said before, it all depends in your needs. If you want absolute portability one could also argue to pass the data between the webserver (controller) and the script (model) wrapped in xml.
Content management and Custom [tags]
Moderator: General Moderators
Apart from the question of how well MVC can be applied to dynamic websites, what is the advantage of passing data to the model in xml? Wouldn't that be better off encapsulated in some kind of ModelData object?timvw wrote:If you want absolute portability one could also argue to pass the data between the webserver (controller) and the script (model) wrapped in xml.
That's why i've repeatedly said: it all depends on your needs.McGruff wrote:Apart from the question of how well MVC can be applied to dynamic websites, what is the advantage of passing data to the model in xml? Wouldn't that be better off encapsulated in some kind of ModelData object?timvw wrote:If you want absolute portability one could also argue to pass the data between the webserver (controller) and the script (model) wrapped in xml.
At a given point you decide: i use 'cgi' to pass data between webserver and script. Just as you decide i use 'foo' to pass data between script and template.