Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by tsdtsdtsd

  1. Hi, I'm reworking and upgrading an old system to processwire. The old versions of that site have some 301 redirect from even older versions of the site. What i did is, while deploying to the live server I prepend the redirects to the top of the PW htaccess automatically. Two kinds of redirects look like this: Redirect 301 /contact /legal RedirectMatch permanent /index.php/k_radio.* /knowhow While checking the first redirect I had a strange behaviour which I can't explain. The old URL /contact should redirect to /legal. Instead it redirects to /legal?it=contact. The result is a 404. While /legal exists, PW tries to load another page with the "it" parameter and fails. The RedirectMatch statement works perfect, only the Redirect 301 doesn't work. The easy fix would be to use RedirectMatch for everything, but I want to understand what's the problem here The Redirect should stop further processing of the htaccess, redirect, and start from top with the new url. I don't get why it doesn't
  2. Awesome feature! I hope it's a 301, not a 302 Does this happen while dispatching or do you modify the .htaccess on runtime?
  3. Absolutely ^^ but fits my needs! Thank you very much diogo
  4. Thank you guys but you both got me wrong I'll try to clarify: I created a custom field of the type Page. I can assign a node to it (Test) and when using it in a template, it will give me the ability to choose one or more pages out of this set in the backend (childA, childB, childC). Let's say i selected childB. I the frontend, i don't want to retrieve the selected page in this field (childB). I want to get the set of pages that i could have selected or in other words, the set of pages which the backend would show me to choose from (childA, childB, childC). I could retrieve those pages with $pages->get(), but i want to keep it dynamic. I don't want to change the code in the template if the parent node for the page-field is getting changed in backend. So, with $fields->get() I can catch the field itself outside of page-context, but i dont know how to get the possible elements in this field. Or at least get the defined parent so i could use $pages->get() again. Hope this clarifies
  5. Hi, i have a field of the type Page. It has a node assigned (let's say node 'Test' with children a, b, c). I want to retrieve the currently assigned set of pages (a,b,c) without doing a $pages search on the assigned node. // What i don't want to do (to keep it dynamic) $subset = $pages->get('/test')->children(); // What i want to do $field = $fields->get('pagesField'); // ? // $field->children() -> not defined // $field->data->? Any ideas? Thanks in advance
  6. Ah I got it This post helped me to add the valid attributes ()
  7. Hi there, I have the same issue with nofollow. The attribute is important for SEO (http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=96569). I have no problem with the idea to switch to HTML mode in tinyMCE, but when i insert the attribute in HTML mode, tinyMCE just removes it when I save. I don't want to rush you to implement additional attributes but it would be helpfull if you know how I can remove this filter mechanism or modify it (preferably without touching the core, but I guess thats impossible atm). I'll take a look to tinyMCE forums, maybe i can find something there
  8. I'm already hitting myself in the face for not using the search... sorry, and thank you mate. But still, as i get the error message but no recognizable error in the backend, maybe we've got a bug here. ryan, if you want/need any info on the system feel free to ask.
  9. I just tried to install anyway. Can't see any errors yet. Backend seems to work as intended.
  10. Hey, I just tried to install pw on a customers server. On the compatibility check i get "Failed test for: json support". I'm not sure what exactly is missing here. Any hints? Thanks guys
  11. Awesome! That's what i was waiting for Can't wait for you to publish it
  12. I can't really describe why I don't like the extra field to choose if this page is a main or footer navigation page. I think I will go with a extra structure for the menus. It's more flexible when you need to add new stuff or edit. I'll try it out tonight. You're very helpful, thank you!
  13. Plenty of options. Thank you, I think I can work with that.
  14. So it's my fault for not searching correctly ^^ Sorry and thanks
  15. Hi, I have two new fieldtypes in my mind: 1. Well... Array Like the image fieldtype, it should contain multiple text values in one field. A traditional array. 2. Multi-Value Field This field contains multiple other fields and acts like an array (see 1.). You create this fieldtype and assign other fields to it, which will then be only visible in the new multi-value field. So it's a set or group of other fields. Combined with the array functionality you can have something like this: foreach( $page->multiField as $item) { echo $item->id; echo $item->name; echo $item->image; } I know, you can do something similar with child pages. But if your page already has child pages you would end up in a mixture of real and structural child pages which can get really messy.
  16. Hi, I still can't figure out how to create multiple navigations. Let's say I have this structure: Home About Products Contact * Legal * Other Stuff (Hidden) Contact and Legal should be in a footer navigation, rest in default main navigation. "Other stuff" is hidden already. Decision by template is not an option because the real structure has a lot more pages/templates and I think it's inefficient to manually ad new templates to the menu modules/templates each time. Also I have pages with the same template but which should show in different menus. Next option is to add a field in every template to identify if this page should be rendered in top or footer navigation. Would work, but I don't like it How do you guys beat this challange?
  17. Thank you both for the kind explanation. Your answers enlightened my view on processwire. I think I know where you're trying to get me. I thought about it and realized that only the word "page" irritated me. After 3 years of Zend Framework you get kind of addicted/obsessed by strict separation and proper wording. After this mental knot is unraveled I'm starting to figure out. Time for some serious testing
  18. Hi there, first I like to thank you for processwire, awesome little CMS you made [edit: I just saw that 1-3 were already mentioned... nevermind, but 4 is important ] I have 4 wishes/ideas (not for christmas though), maybe take a look at them: 1. Preview I guess this was mentioned already: processwires preview system is not that great. Main purpose is to have a preview of unsaved changes while editing a page. 2. Locking I dont want to destroy the work of another user. So it should be possible to lock a page before start making changes, so other users in the backend dont start to edit the same page. 3. Versions Processwire needs a history of changes that are done to a page. I just deleted something important? No problem, go back to the last version... 4. Multiple Trees (my biggest concern) This is maybe the biggest change, but brings a huge benefit. ATM we have one big tree with pages. My suggestion is to make it possible to create you own trees which have semantical purposes and separate pages from logical/structural data. This is not easy to describe, so here is my real-worl example: Currently I'm creating a company homepage for a friend. Somewhere in the middle of some pages there will be a row with four little boxes/teasers which contain stuff like "product of the month". The thing is, that he wants to include these teasers on multiple pages, some with same content others not. He wants to be flexible, tell the system "on this page, i want the same teasers, but only two of them with double width", or change the order and stuff like that. Also he has multiple navigations. My approach is this: Instead of replicating the sitemap in processwire pages i'll do somethiong like this: Root (this node cant be deleted at the moment, so i have to just leave it there) - Main navigation - - Home - - Products - - ... - Footer navigation - - Contact - - ... - Teasers - - Product X Teaser 1col - - Product Y teaser 2cols - - Customers voice - - ... - Products - - ... So, the typical processwire pages are child nodes of "Main navigation" and "Footer navigation". Benefit here is separation and easier implementation of menu modules. Child nodes of "Teasers" contain data for one teaser element. Benefit is again separation. This is what I would call a structural or data tree. When I create the template for the homepage, i'll add a page reference field, where he can choose the teasers he would like to display on this particular page. So, he has the power to reuse these teaser on any page, change order and stuff like that. As you can see, it's possible to create the flexibility needed. But it feels wrong to work with a page object where you should have a data object. With multiple trees and multiple kinds of trees, we could separate stuff and build logical applications instead of just doing workarounds like I do. The same with the "Products" node you can see in my example: childs contain data of one particular product. So you can reference to a product, use it's data, on any page or module. I'm looking forward to get some opinions on this matter, what do you think about this? Any additional ideas? Maybe I can even get Ryans opinion? Thanks, tsd
  • Create New...