Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

w3c.studio24.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 208 posts

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#101

Post by gexla »

lovetocode wrote: post #86

Am I the only one who hates the whole concept of a CMS? I much prefer just working HTML changes into a dev cycle. CMS encourages marketing and sales people to wreak havoc on your web experience. Working in HTML changes into the dev process also helps keep the engineering team aligned with the business/marketing strategy. I use Middleman for generating static html websites and it works great. I would love to see the c…

> I much prefer just working HTML changes into a dev cycle.

Have you worked with either Wordpress or Craft? With each of these, you control the HTML which gets generated via templates which are files on disk which can be checked into your repository.

The content management element of the CMS allows users to log into the control panel to manage the content. This experience is controlled by the developer. In some cases, you might constrain editing to a simple WYSIWYG experience which is similar to support you might expect from Markdown. In other cases, a developer might allow blocks of HTML which could even include styling.

How would you expect "marketing and sales people" to work with Middleman or any other static site generator?

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#102

Post by todotask »

seanwilson wrote: post #79

Is there an open source CMS that people would recommended for use with a static website generator for large websites? Netlify CMS is interesting for example and I love how content changes are versioned in Git. I like static website generation but don't want to get locked into a proprietary CMS platform.

Other than versioning, are there important features we could benefits?

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#103

Post by gexla »

ThinkBeat wrote: post #96
lovetocode wrote: post #86

Am I the only one who hates the whole concept of a CMS? I much prefer just working HTML changes into a dev cycle. CMS encourages marketing and sales people to wreak havoc on your web experience. Working in HTML changes into the dev process also helps keep the engineering team aligned with the business/marketing strategy. I use Middleman for generating static html websites and it works great. I would love to see the c…

I think all CMS I have used (aside for one I built of course) Are annoying, and getting pixel perfect results is challenging. I presume that will become easier when we move to headless CMS. The reason I like he and that often insists on it ,is because my team finds it both tedious and boring to have to make constant changes every time some in marking or legal or content writers which to ”change a few things” It is al…

I swear nobody making comments on this item has used the software in question.

With both Craft and Wordpress you can do EXACTLY the same output as you would with a static HTML site.

How does a headless CMS solve a problem which you apparently know nothing about?

Are you creating custom content management systems without knowing how the most popular options work? That's not to say you have to know how these work, but I would be skeptical of hiring anyone who didn't know the capabilities of what's already on the market.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#105

Post by retox »

cheeze wrote: post #52
darekkay wrote: post #3

Not choosing and inaccessible platform was the right thing to do. Hopefully this will make Automattic reconsider their priorities regarding web accessibility. Related write-up: https://adrianroselli.com/2020/09/gutenberg-accessibility-co...

Ironic that the link looks kinda... terrible. I can read it, but it's not pleasant at all.

The entire first screen on a 1080 monitor is made of broken looking headers and an outrageously large title. Just garbage.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#106

Post by seanwilson »

When working with WordPress, can anyone recommend a trustworthy place to go for plugin recommendations?

The problems I find with WordPress are:

- WordPress core is missing a ton of stuff you'd expect to be there so you have to turn to plugins.

- It's hard to assess the quality of plugins. They conflict with each other, kill page speed, they break as WordPress is upgraded, and there's tons of bad advice you have to navigate around (I find this problem with PHP in general, where top voted answers/suggestions are bad so you need to keep your wits about you more-so than other communities).

Generally when I'm fixing WordPress websites, I'm stripping out all plugins (I've seen over 50 on one site before!) that have been added by non-technical users, then trying to find the simplest way with the fewest plugins to get the functionality back to what it was.

You can get pretty far with just ACF, a contact form plugin, an optimisation plugin (how is page caching still not built into WordPress?), and coding small features into themes directly.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#107

Post by j0ej0ej0e »

momokoko wrote: post #2

Shameful. As someone that has worked with Craft it has a ton of awful edge cases once you get deep into a project. Craft absolutely does not scale.

I don't think it's shameful, though just niaeve to expect it to work well.

To be fair I do think it is difficult to make a choice until you make an app of size you will not know about those edge cases.

My agency worked on a site which had ~1M+ pages and the backend became unusable (entries table was dead), task management had to be bespoke, search had to be dealt with by Elasticsearch amongst other things.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#108

Post by sofixa »

noahtallen wrote: post #58
ggm wrote: post #8

Is wp still php? What if you want a cdn outcome which doesn't drive to an sql backend? I've yet to experience wp consciously without it making me wince. I know a lot of former print press is using it, so the for profit sector likes it. That does not axiomatically make it best of breed. Being php is also not axiomatically worst of breed. The questions are decoupled really. 1) is wp still php 2) is wp best of breed. 3)…

> I've yet to experience wp consciously without it making me wince. You might be surprised to hear that likely a third of the websites you visit run WordPress. [0] So it’s not really constrained to just former print, it’s basically any site that needs to have a lot of content. I think it can be argued that WordPress is the best CMS out there because you can really make it do just about anything you need if you know P…

No, the real problem with WordPress is security and code quality of plugins, of which you require a lot.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#109

Post by fevangelou »

tweetle_beetle wrote: post #94
fevangelou wrote: post #33

Not a WP fan (although I've built large scale sites professionally) but the arguments regarding the frontend are kinda BS. What does Gutenberg have to do with the entire frontend layout? Gutenberg can still be used just for the main content region, not surrounding blocks. Not really a "talented" team after all. Plus, UK dev companies tend to be biased towards Craft these days cause (guess why) it's also UK based. I a…

> Plus, UK dev companies tend to be biased towards Craft these days... This seems a tad hyperbolic surely? For every Craft CMS site built in the UK, my guess is that there are 200+ WordPress sites built. Is there a particular niche that you are seeing this trend in - enterprise sites?

My mistake on its origin. Indeed though it's used on some high profile (albeit not high traffic) sites by well known UK agencies.

Re: On not choosing WordPress for the W3C redesign project

#110

Post by colourgarden »

One important point tucked away here that is getting missed:

> Another major factor in the decision to remove WordPress from consideration was that they found “no elegant solution to content localization and translation.”

To restate - WordPress does not support multiple languages by default. And anyone who has built a multi-language WP site with one of the popular plugins (WPML, Polylang) can attest that it's a pretty terrible editorial experience.

Craft, for example, has (very good) multi-language support out-of-the-box.

Studio24 and W3C probably should have pushed that point rather than accessibility concerns.

Post reply on HN