Pete

Loving this Luis - looked at the link and it's very nice indeed, good work I looked at the Google Doc too and ran it through Google Translate - I think pretty much all of that fits for the UK and probably most of the rest of the world too. Some countries have multiple tax classes just to make things interesting (Canada is one of them I think) so I would suggest that as Antti has done any further development of new features be really easy to extend or override where necessary (pretty obvious I know ). Keep up the good work as it would be amazing to eventually have a shop profile with the most common features already set up that can be installed with a blank PW site as a starting point for e-commerce sites.

Also, not sure whether you've seen this thread: Might be worth noting for future clients working with Drupal that there are some steps to help converting content.

Hi Joshua I think you're right in that you can do anything with PW that you put your mind to. I've had the same experience you've had with clients wanting to use Drupal but with WordPress, and have vowed in another thread not to touch any more work that comes my way where the client wants to use it - it was just that unpleasant an experience last time I used it. The problem I find is when someone else has implemented a dozen plugins and you have to go into someone's work and find out where the issues are if something doesn't work as expected - you spend more time bug-hunting instead of developing. That said, a lot of it can be to do with familiarity of a platform. I've got no experience with Drupal and little with Wordpress, so I'm sure if the roles were reveresed I'd struggle a bit with ProcessWire at first, just maybe not as much as I have with other systems. It's just the frustration of forcing a system to do what you want when you know there's a quicker, better way for a given type of project that really puts me off using some other systems nowadays. With enough time I think you can achieve anything with ProcessWire. Whilst I've not built a site exceeding more than a few hundred pages yet, I have managed to integrate it with forum software and built a file repository. I've never found myself thinking I couldn't do anything with it - it's just a matter of working out how to do something rather than if you can. For one project I did have to do a little work to mock-up a small piece of a site to entice someone away from another system to ProcessWire and it worked, so one way to do this if you feel they're open to suggestion is to put together a small demo that's relevant to their content and show them how it could work out better for them. Of course, this has to take into account whether they're receptive in the first place, plus it's a case of weighing up the chance they'll switch against time when you're not earning money, but it comes back to the saying "a picture is worth a thousand words"... I think "a demo is worth a short novel" applies in this case It's always easier if you have time to show someone something than to try and describe the benefit. I'm also really excited about a lot of the modules that have been released recently - for example some members here are talking about some interesting things with regards to Antti's shop module that look amazing (had a quick peek at the example linked in this particular post and loving it: http://processwire.c...isa/#entry18784 ). I'd love to soon be able to use ProcessWire for any type of site because I believe it's flexible enough to fit pretty much any role.

A hash is usually used in a URL to jump to a HTML anchor further down a page (like <a name="bob"></a> halfway down a page called "tim.html" could be called via yoursite.com/tim.html#bob and that page would load and automatically jump down to that anchor). I'm not sure an anchor would work any other way due to this.

I really like this implementation of columns and am going to use it on a few sites soon I think to make better use ot the page - ryan, could there be an option in the fieldset options to hide the title rather than what's been done above (hidden by CSS)? Not that there's anything wrong with using field widths of course, but this way that had a combination of the two does look neater in my opinion, and certainly adds more options. I wonder if there's scope to include some things like this in the default site profile too - just to show some more possibilities out of the box? Only problem of course is that I can't think of any of the default templates that would use this fieldset-as-solumns layout.

I think from memory that the table is called users (can't check from my phone) but the password would of course be encrypted so that wouldn't do you much good if you we're intending to reset it there.

It's just a case of including the class and you're away with a couple of lines of code though so I'm not getting where that's making it too complicated in this case. I just personally don't think that it's a good idea to exclude Twitter because they don't use Oauth2 if its not hard to resolve - its an immensely popular platform and I think would be worth the extra code. Like I said, I'm happy to look at it once the rest of the module is done and see how best it makes sense to integrate it.

Could we not just include a few more files? I know you're wanting everything to be Oauth2, but it does only take 20 mins to sort the Twitter integration - just a thought and not a criticism. It's not like download size is really an issue either thinking about it. I'm happy to take a look at it when the rest of the module is ready

Try something like find("name=$mypage") in your code above since you don't have the full path available to you. I'm assuming you're wanting to match against the sanitised page name (ie. the URL version of the page title) - if not its title= and not name=

Twitter auth is simple enough with Matt Harris' library (he works for Twitter). I used to use Tijs' library myself, but Matt's is more up to date and seemed easier to use - it's used in one of my Twitter modules for PW in fact.

Don't worry, when I started with PW everything I tried to do had an easier way of achieving it Quite often I'll scratch my head over something for hours one evening and then have a eureka moment an solve it the next morning after sleep and caffeine

Erm... No PHP required - just add " | Your Site Name" before the closing </title> tag and you're done. I think that's what you meant anyway?

Haha, I just got that reference! When was it the Mayans predicted the end of the world again? I forget.

Well there was that one that President Obama won in 2009 Like many news reports are saying, it's an odd time to be awarding it but it is actually for everything over the past many decades and bringing together half a billion people from various nations since Europe had been in turmoil and was really on the ropes earlier last century.

Are you definitely trying to access it at yoursite.com/processwire ? Sorry, got to ask the silly questions first.

Nico - increased it to 50. Marty - I suspect this will be fixed in the next version coming *soon* (no idea when soon is, but the speed of updates in PW means waiting for any other software update is like having your teeth pulled out ). I'd hesitate to spend time on it just yet if a new release is coming in the next week or so, but I agree that it is terribly frustrating when you press "back" on your phone and can't click on the topics beneath the overlay. Marc - yes it does. If you're on a smartphone you can load the forums, touch the icon at the top-right and touch the New Content button. It's pretty quick as it doesn't load the usual theme for the forums and works reasonably well even in slower data areas, although 3G and wi-fi would be preferable to waiting.

I like the images on all the other pages - the homepage one I keep trying to work out if he has any arms or not and how long it takes him to button that outfit up It's a good-looking site and I think the other imagery used throughout manages successfully to get away form the image of lawyers as stuffy, unapproachable people (not sure whether they have that image worldwide, but I suspect they do).

I like Marc's idea as then you could have a field called gallery that could be a multiple image inputfield and you're away

I like this because it was already what I was doing The closing PHP tag is something I've picked up from coding with PW.

Ah right, makes sense that it would be something that you would want to use with or without pages.

I've used MooTools before jQuery. I didn't enjoy the experience of asking a question on the forums once and getting shot down for it - especially since it was my first question, but that does sometimes come with the territory (though I had read the instructions and used Google, just probably wasn't searching for the right terms). I find jQuery to be easer to use, but that's just my personal preference and I don't get into complex classes with javascript at all, so opt for what I find to be the easier to use library for general daily use.

I've used this script, built from stuff I learned here to back up sites in the past. It will only work on Linux hosting though. To use it, create a folder above your public_html folder called "backups". In this create two folders called "site" and "db". It must be above the public_html folder else you will end up backing up your backups and you will soon run out of disk space that way Now you need to open the attached file and change the path near the top to the path to your backups folder. Next, scroll down to line 41 and enter your site's root username and password (or a database users that you have created that can read all relevant databases for your site). That's it really - upload it into public_html and call it via a web browser to test it, but it should backup the entire contents of public_html and all databases, plus as a special bonus your mail folder, which on this type of hosting means that even if the whole server bursts into flames you can just re-create the mailboxes, put that folder back and the mail is back too Since it uses system commands to run the backups it won't work on restricted hosting, but the easiest way is to follow the above instructions and if it creates files in your /home/yoursite/backups/site and /db folders that have a filesize greater than 0kb then it will work on your hosting. Because it uses system commands rather than PHP to back up, it won't mater much what size your site is and is suitable for sites in the gigabyte range (all depends on your hardware of course). The other thing to note is that it keeps 7 days of backups and cleans out anything older. You can change that by altering the $livecutoff variable to something other than 7. This could use some improvement of course, but I use SyncBack Pro to download the backups each day to a local drive, and also periodically back these up to an external drive kept elsewhere (can you tell I've had trouble with hosting and hard drive failures before? ). cronbackup.php

I think the main thing is that when you know there's an easier tool to work with it makes everything else a chore. I was a bit surprised about the SEO person's response from your post above, but I guess I shouldn't be and thinking about it I had a very similar conversation with someone earlier this year myself who was worrying about re-training to use PW. It can be a hurdle to adopting a new system when clients think there will be a massive learning curve and it's generally just because that's what they've cmoe to expect. I think the main point to get across is just how straightforward things can be when everything is laid out logically. We have the luxury (and it is a luxury compared to most other systems) of being able to have custom fields for everything, and being able to name your fields and order them how you like means it becomes very intuitive to the point where there isn't actually much training required. I'm the same with MODx now - used it for quite some years and going back to it is hard work sometimes. Most of the clients I have that still use it don't need new features though so it's just a case of occasional updates, but I do try and convert them when I can. With this current site I really shouldn't complain and should simply have done more research, but it's the case with most projects when you're taking something on that's already established that you will eventually run into something unforeseen - if you could afford to spend days checking out every aspect of a job before taking it on it would be okay, but you generally have to hit the ground running and get on with it. It helps to vent your frustrations sometimes It's another one to chalk up to experience, but I still don't want to work with anything other than ProcessWire again

I've been working on a site recently that is in WordPress, and have wasted several hours on not noticing that the previous dev had used a mad-crazy image based menu system (should have inspected the CSS more closely). Since I'm not used to WordPress, I was trying to sift through the many (and, in a lot of cases for this site, unnecessary) plugins to find the fault. So okay, it was partially my fault for not noticing that, but just the whole rest of the experience has drawn a line in the sand - everything is so difficult and time-consuming to achieve that I think even if I knew it inside out it would still be long-winded So, no more WP clients for me, thanks all the same, even if there are big bucks on the table it's not worth my sanity any more and is too draining. I'd much rather roll out/update PW sites and enjoy myself rather than tear my hair out over the many and varied caveats of working with WordPress. Call me lazy, but I think it's more about using the right tool for the right job.

WillyC - you can be cryptic at times, but I think what you're hopeful about is ryan's earlier answer to Antti's question about file fields and when they might be coming. So ryan, like WillyC I'm curious to know if you're working on files next? Presumably with save to page now an option this is a bit of an easier prospect? Obviously there are still security concerns, but if you at least assume that form-to-page submissions create unsaved pages then that might be half of the battle (the other half of it being that if you can guess the page ID and already know the filename you could access the file, so some security implications there maybe?).