Leaderboard

If you're running the dev version (which I like to do since so many amazing features make it into PW each Friday), then reading the blog is a must: http://processwire.com/blog/ I'd say read at least the last 10 posts (better yet, all of them) and continue reading every Friday. They get straight to the point and have nuggets of information that aren't in the Docs section. My opinion is the Docs are great and will get you far, but is missing other nuggets of specific information. For example, you would never know there's a function called wireIncludeFile unless (a) you read it in the blog, (b) you somehow found a mention to it in the forums or © explored the source code a bit.

Thanks for identifying that, which is indeed a bug - not sure when it broke. Will check it out now. Edit: Fixed - please update to 1.3.2.

Would anyone else like to see the ability to make use of PW variables to build up dynamic descriptions and notes for fields? This is a very simplistic example and not that useful, but I do have some use cases where the ability to do something like this would be very handy: $f->description = __('Please make sure you fill out this field based on the content of the {page.parent.title} summary field.'); As I said - a bad example, but I think this could be a powerful addition in some scenarios.

Hi Forum, I recently had a chat with a friend who was introduced to PW by me. He said: "brilliant cms, poor documentation." His comment makes me think about the cheatsheet: While we see new API methods introduced at a very fast pace, the cheatsheet doesn't seem to keep up. That's sad, because it's such a good resource. So, how can I (as a user with very limited PHP skills) help to update the cheatsheet? Is somebody skilled willing to team up with me - as kind of a supervisor - for the update tasks? Or are there any plans on behalf of the team to update the cheatsheet? Thanks!

Hello all! I'm not sure if this is the correct forum to post an introduction, but I didn't want to clutter a specific topic elsewhere. I've been reading various forum topics, wiki, and docs, for the past twenty or so hours and decided to sign up last night. I just want to say that I am impressed with Processwire itself, as well as the community's eagerness to assist us newbies. I'll most likely have a number of questions later. As of now, I suffer from information overload due to the amount of reasearch over the past few weeks. I'm sure some of you old-timers, like myself, are familiar with *Tilt*, which is currently emblazoned on the back of my eyeballs. I look forward to learning and working with PW on a number of up-coming projects, and eventually become a contributing member of this community. Thanks for having me. Best regards, Rick

I'm really much more keen on using semantic values in my code, as it's much more readable. 0=hide|Hide 1=article|Article 2=else|Whatever if($page->is("article_options.value=hide"){ //the hide option is ticked, clear markup $out = ""; }

Thanks Mike!

That would need an answer from someone other than me. I know that it works, but I'm a total noob when it comes to the actual syntax of those rules.

Hey, a lot of times I create a role called "editor" and give all of the page-* permissions to it. No problems so far. But I normally forget to go to "home" template afterwards to set the permissions for the template, too. So my idea is to show a list of templates (maybe only the once you have selected as "Manage access individually") in a list like the following in the role edit screen: I think this would be a huge performance improvement and could save a lot of confusion and clicks.

@rick: If any question should appear while you're (hopefully) do your projects in the next days just come back to the forum and ask - we're happy to help you here (And welcome to the ProcessWire family of course )

You could limit the removal of get parameters to just the frontend by disabling the rule for everything in the admin-backend "folder". Disabling them in the backend is a very bad idea as lots of core and 3rd party modules use them.

You can change it, but wherever you do so it's most likely to late to be picked up by the internal check, that compares the actual httpHost to the whitelisted ones. The changes would only be available to everything running later. The only way to have it pick up for the internal check, too, is by editing the config file itself, which could be made automatically. Another option would be supplying no httpHosts all together and call the check manually after adding all the needed domains. But it's a question for Ryan to answer if this would actually be of use for the security. @Soma I can understand that need. If you'd build some kind of SaaS software, where the user should be able to add their domains, you wouldn't want to edit those manually.

I am new to ProcessWire. I am not new, however, to programming (started with assembly back in the '70s). I'm not writing a marketing speel here -- I simply want you (the developers and community) to know how I arrived at ProcessWire as my solution. I have specific requirements for a numer of projects that I will be starting (hopefully) in the next few days, and had been researching various CMSs and frameworks the past few weeks to find a 'one-size-fits-all' toolbox. I have currently forty-four cms installs (from academic to zikula) and thirteen different frameworks ( from akelos to zoop). They all have their merits, and are fine solutions for many users and developers. ProcessWire is one of the original 44 installs, but at first 'glance' didn't seem to fit what I was looking for. Later, after searching the web for a solution to one particular issue, a link back to a PW solution emerged. I clicked the link, and low and behold, ProcessWire *was* what I had been searching for all this time. On a related note, google has sent me a nasty-gram about the reactor they had to fire up because of my queries. The primary strength of ProcessWire that I have discovered so far, is that I (as a developer) am not limited in the tools I can use, or the tools I can create. ProcessWire is sleek and efficient. It is a toolbox full of tools that allow me to build a fine watch, a multi-story office complex, or a fishing pole. The other applications suffer from either bloatware or limited tool availability, or worse, both. I could very well accomplish my project goals using any of these other applications but with much head-banging, hair-pulling, and cosumption of scotch. The biggest 'selling' factor to me for ProcessWire, however, was it's efficient engieering in the construction of built-in tools I will require now, and the ability to create my own tools for use in the future.

Have you tried other cms systems before ? If yes, you are going to fall in code with Processwire - - - - - And this time it is going to be for real Welcome.

Hi rick, Welcome to the world of ProcessWire! Enjoy the journey and good luck with your upcoming projects Cheers

∞Textformatter Normalize UTF8 uses a lightweight PHP class (Patchwork UTF-8) for UTF8 normalization. Use it if .. If you check the page with the W3C HTML5 validator, you'll maybe get the following warning: Text run is not in Unicode Normalization Form C. Or if you notice strange output in some browsers (bold letters, shifted characters, ..).What it does In Unicode it is possible to produce the same text with different sequences of characters. For example, take the Hungarian word világ. The fourth letter could be stored in memory as a precomposed U+00E1 LATIN SMALL LETTER A WITH ACUTE (a single character) or as a decomposed sequence of U+0061 LATIN SMALL LETTER A followed by U+0301 COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT (two characters). világ = világ The Unicode Standard allows either of these alternatives, but requires that both be treated as identical. To improve efficiency, an application will usually normalize text before performing searches or comparisons. Normalization, in this case, means converting the text to use all precomposed or all decomposed characters. There are four normalization forms specified by the Unicode Standard: NFC, NFD, NFKC and NFKD. The C stands for (pre-)composed, and the D for decomposed. The K stands for compatibility. To improve interoperability, the W3C recommends the use of NFC normalized text on the Web. -- W3C