0

Currently I have a web site full of static pages. This minimizes web server load and guarantees that this site will run even on tiny Linux-based hardware web server.

I am seeking for an ability to make master pages for my site and I like the way used by Ruby on Rails, but this technology is redundant for a simple web site and is too heavy for a simple hardware web server.

I like the SSI, it is really lightweight and cross-platform, but it does not provide master pages, it only makes includes that each document should maintain by oneself.

I like an AJAX technology, but it is client-side dependent.

The IFRAME technology does the opposite to what I want - it references from master page to slave page, and I need the reverse.

Is there something else left?

Paul
  • 25,812
  • 38
  • 124
  • 247

2 Answers2

1

Template-Toolkit, specifically the wrapper directive, should do the trick.

You can use ttree at build time to generate static pages, avoiding the need for any server side technology beyond a simple HTTPD.

Quentin
  • 914,110
  • 126
  • 1,211
  • 1,335
0

Em.. php includes?

So: CSS, Javascript, Includes directories detailing reusable styling, client scripting, and markup respectively?

There is no way to get any form of master page in the way that you are talking about without server side scripting I'm afraid. The best you can hope for is a JavaScript file that loads other JavaScript files, and external stylesheets (one unusual method I saw was the creation of a universal stylesheet that imported many others - but I didn't see all that much benefit to organisation myself). You could always use iframes... but iframes, as you point out aren't designed for that sort of functionality. That sort of functionality was within the scope of frames, and that had unpleasant results.

If you want to use something like php your server will naturally have to support php, but it is a simple way to produce easy organisation of your pages without having to dive neck deep into a complicated framework like Rails. In my experience adopting a CMS, particularly that developed by somebody else can be more trouble than it's worth.

Stumbler
  • 2,056
  • 7
  • 35
  • 61