3 ms·
I suspect it's because people regard the implied foreach loop of data-scope to not count as logicless. Personally I can see the arguments both ways, and have co
by mst 11y ago
I suspect it's because people regard the implied foreach loop of data-scope to not count as logicless. Personally I can see the arguments both ways, and have concluded that simply ensuring I'm using the same definition of logicless as the people I'm talking to is the best answer.
- toolz 11y agoAhh, well I never claimed it was logicless. I claimed the templates were logicless, and they are. The logic is kept separate inside the processors that you bind to the template.
- mst 11y agoExcept the -scope part means that the foreach-ness is indicated by the template, so people consider that to be not-logicless. I understood your claim fine. I'm trying to explain why it might be considered false (and I did already say I consider the arguments each way basically hair splitting).
- toolz 11y agoInteresting, I've never imagined an identifier could be labeled as logic. There is no need for a scope, if you mean that the outer identifier is logic. Anything could be the identifier and inside the processor you could define anything to be the outer layer. You could flip data-attr and data-scope just as easily, so I'm not sure where there could ever be an argument that those things represent logic rather than markup. Either way, I _think_ I have a better understand of potential conflicting views. Thanks for taking the time to explain.