This has been raised frequently by the test team over the years. The primary problem is that templates are very likely to be interactive, and you really can't do interactive things during rule processing (well, technically you can, but in practice, it's very unsatisfactory).
And just to pre-empt your next suggestion, which is "well, why not add it and leave it up to the user to ensure that only non-interactive templates are used"... The problem with this is that it would increase the technical support burden, which is already well beyond what I can handle. When I look at new capabilities in the program these days, a very major consideration is whether they will increase (or reduce) the technical support burden in the program. Things that are likely to increase the burden seldom make it in any more, while things that reduce the burden usually get fast-tracked. Sad, but unfortunately just the way things are. There's only so much one person can do, and I'm already pretty much at the limit of that: if there were some way I could remove my technical support burden entirely, the world would probably be quite amazed how much more productive I would be.
Getting back to your point, though... It's a good idea. If I could think of some way of implementing it without creating an inconsistency in the program, I'd definitely consider it.
Cheers!
-- David --
This has been raised frequently by the test team over the years. The primary problem is that templates are very likely to be interactive, and you really can't do interactive things during rule processing (well, technically you can, but in practice, it's very unsatisfactory).
And just to pre-empt your next suggestion, which is "well, why not add it and leave it up to the user to ensure that only non-interactive templates are used"... The problem with this is that it would increase the technical support burden, which is already well beyond what I can handle. When I look at new capabilities in the program these days, a very major consideration is whether they will increase (or reduce) the technical support burden in the program. Things that are likely to increase the burden seldom make it in any more, while things that reduce the burden usually get fast-tracked. Sad, but unfortunately just the way things are. There's only so much one person can do, and I'm already pretty much at the limit of that: if there were some way I could remove my technical support burden entirely, the world would probably be quite amazed how much more productive I would be.
Getting back to your point, though... It's a good idea. If I could think of some way of implementing it without creating an inconsistency in the program, I'd definitely consider it.
Cheers!
-- David --