On Tue, Oct 08, 2002 at 10:46:37AM -0400, Greg Ward wrote:
>which is quite acceptable IMHO.  I could live with 'html' instead of
>'htmlstr' too.

Won't this collide with the fairly common usage 'from quixote import
html ; html.link(...)'?  I vote for 'htmlstr'.

I'm lukewarm on the 'def foo [html]' syntax, preferring the existing
use of 'template', but don't mind that much either way.  (We are going
to support 'template' for a few versions to come, right?)

--amk