151–160 of 208 posts
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.
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Composer support is absolutely fine and there are well maintained ways of keeping plugins and themes under Composer and have been for many years. You need to use a third party service or setup. > Yes, but adding further content types at the level of code or these plugins is easy, trivially so. Compared to what? Drupal? CraftCMS? Joomla? Where you go to a UI and do it all, versus installing a plugin with it's own qu…
Fair enough. Probably at "agree to disagree" here. I'll agree that its easier to do custom post types on other CMS. But sometimes at the cost of real overheads in terms of complexity for users to swallow to get there. Caching is built into the core, which is what all caching plugins leverage, the interface to it is hidden. PHP is a theming engine. I've never got why people escape into Blade, Twig or so on. PHP was de…
Compare a Twig theme with a PHP based one. The former is much cleaner because views and controllers are separated, there's clean ways to reuse views, and the syntax is cleaner and more concise for common operations. The standard PHP approach in WordPress gets messy really quickly.
Related, but I can't believe how much responsibility WordPress theme writers have to manually make sure echoed strings are escaped properly (Twig has the same problem because it would be fighting against WordPress otherwise).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Composer support is absolutely fine and there are well maintained ways of keeping plugins and themes under Composer and have been for many years. You need to use a third party service or setup. > Yes, but adding further content types at the level of code or these plugins is easy, trivially so. Compared to what? Drupal? CraftCMS? Joomla? Where you go to a UI and do it all, versus installing a plugin with it's own qu…
Fair enough. Probably at "agree to disagree" here. I'll agree that its easier to do custom post types on other CMS. But sometimes at the cost of real overheads in terms of complexity for users to swallow to get there. Caching is built into the core, which is what all caching plugins leverage, the interface to it is hidden. PHP is a theming engine. I've never got why people escape into Blade, Twig or so on. PHP was de…
I think one thing that's missing from the templating engine argument is WordPress' data model. While PHP may be a templating language WP's API to access data is a huge pain. A great example is wp_nav_menu. To modify it in any meaningful way you have to use the Walker Class. Seriously? It's an array. If WP's data model were better you could definitely 'foreach' your way through that thing... but you can't.
Antlers has a shorthand syntax to cycle through its navigation type. Laravel doesn't have a native navigation type but when I set one up it's pointing to table of pages. At this point I can use Blade to go through that table and pull out the appropriate title and url.
Why is this nice? No more "#" for placeholder menu items. More control over the Aria roles, etc.
This is just one win, in my experience, of using Laravel/Statamic.
Edit: for grammar
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Developers love themselves some Git, but that's probably not the best content workflow tool for people who will write copy which actually accomplishes the goals of the site (like making sales.) Why do developers in this thread act as if it's going to be developers writing the content? I never said to expose sales people to Git. Have you tried Netlify CMS? All it's doing is giving non-technical users a pretty fronte…
You mentioned that content changes are versioned in Git using the Netlify workflow. Why would that be useful if not for being part of an editor workflow? If it's not part of the editor workflow, is it part of the development workflow? What are we comparing this to? versioning in Google Docs? MySQL? How is it something I should "love?" > Migrating static sites where the content + theme are all stored in Git is a dream…
All state is stored in Git and Netlify CMS is just a client-side JS script that talks directly to GitHub. It's an interesting approach that suits some projects. Don't read into this comment more than that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. This. I work on large, high-traffic WP sites a lot, and we're essentially keeping a hand full of plugins and writing everything else ourselves. Lots of plugins are complicated because they want to enable ordinary users to customize…
Indeed. This is one of the reasons we started maintaining what is essentially a WordPress-for-enterprise distro, with a mix of first- and third-party code. The third-party plugins we bundle with it are from the select few sources we trust to build and maintain quality code (typically our peers).
Is this available publicly? Most of my work these days is putting right WordPress sites (and setting up Varnish and ESI) rather than building them, but this would be of interest.
I'm technical director of an agency that builds websites solely in WordPress, and I can say with feeling that Gutenberg has (so far) been a disaster not just in terms of accessibility but in terms of clarity of the development process. It's been a moving target since day one, with us constantly scrambling to keep up with large changes in each release. We held off for a while, and have only built three sites with it,…
I'm obviously in my own bubble, but I don't understand people complaining about WordPress. WordPress is by far the worst CMS you could possibly use, every other single CMS is better in every capacity. Let's go through why - Uses PHP 5 spaghetti code with a handful of garbage event listeners and output buffering - Has no integration with composer at all - Doesn't have any form of content types without plugins - Has no…
WordPress is so popular because you will find a plugin or theme to fit almost any need.
The majority of the users are not developers that care about composer, WP source code or out-of-the-box potential. They are users who know that once they install this platform they can create whatever site they want in a few hours doing a few Google searches and maybe spending a few hundred bucks.
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 na…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many CMSs are used to produce static sites; WordPress included. The investment in tech like Gatsby, goes a long way to showing how the market does support this. Market dominance, won't describe the trends a market is moving towards.
> Many CMSs are used to produce static sites; WordPress included. So, which is it? Don't use Wordpress because it's PHP based and doesn't scale? Or Wordpress headless is okay because the front-end is static? Static sites are the future, not Wordpress? Or Wordpress is still going to be a part of the headless market because the CMS supports that functionality? You're confusing me.
I just wanted to correct you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a link to the RSS Club in the next sentence. I broke the "second rule of RSS Club", because I feel accessibility advocacy is more important.
RSS-only content to ... make RSS feel exclusive? Ruin their own discoverability? As an RSS user, this seems like a terrible idea.