douglas81

This is not necessarily a PW-specific thing, but I'm trying to work out a way of incorporating this into the PW workflow. On the backend I'm imagining a repeater field containing a File field and a Text field for T&C. On the front end, I want a site visitor to be able to download that file, but only after ticking a box to say they agree to the T&C. I might also want to ask for a name and/or e-mail address. It seems like what I want is for the download link to be inoperable unless a checkbox is ticked or form field filled in. Javascript wouldn't be foolproof enough for this. I'm thinking it basically needs to be a form which redirects (or does some ajax magic), checks if fields are filled in and, if so, creates a one time download link. If not, it simply requests the required fields be filled in fully. I'm sure this type of thing has been asked before, but I'm struggling to find anything on the forums. Is there a PW module for this functionality? Any insight appreciated!

And, as I was saying, you go along wondering what a certain ProcessWire option would be useful for, and then one day... boom... it makes sense. Today... As much as possible I'm trying to do things without installing modules. It's just the way I like to try and set things up initally. So, I was sitting here trying to work out how best to do tagging. I think doing it by a multiple page select field would be best. But I think to myself... hmm, it would be good if you could actually add a tag from the page edit, rather than on the page tree. And then I recall the option to "Allow new pages to be created from field?". Colour me amazed. Is there nothing Ryan hasn't thought of already!?

I think I may have been mistaken. I was inserting this code in the wrong place.

Got it. That makes sense now. Here's another sort of related question. So, this nav will output the title of a page, and any the title of any extra field. That's great. Now, what if one of those fields is a repeater field. And what if I want to display each item within the repeater field? I set up this... foreach($item->my_repeater_field as $foo) { foreach($foo->my_multi_page_field as $bar) { $out .= $bar->get('my_field'); }; }; And it renders perfectly, as expected, but when I use it in conjunction with the nav function, it throws the following error... Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() It's strange, because it actually works and outputs and loops through the fields as expected. Any clues?

Assume I'm using the site-default template from the current 2.5.2 release/ In my page, I have fields "summary", "duration" and "instrument" I'm using this in my template: if($page->hasChildren) $content .= renderNav($page->children, 0, 'summary && duration && intrument'); Is that the correct way? I mean, using those && operators? It seems to work, but I just want to make sure it's the best and most efficient way. I may end up wanting to output about 10 fields and don't want it to slow things up.

It's all kinds of incredible. It's like... everything I can think of, Ryan has thought of it first, and in a brilliant, flexible way. What I'm noticing is that I'll see all these extra options and menus hidden behind collapsed fields and wonder what they are. Then, the next minute you know, it's like... "hey! that's exactly the functionality I'm looking for!". I mean... I was looking at that input option the other day "Parent of selectable page(s)". Repeating the words in me head, thinking to myself... man, that sounds cryptic. I wonder what that's for. And now today, when I'm trying to get things to work in a certain way, I come across that field again and it all makes perfect sense, perfectly and intuitively laid out. But... and this is the thing that's unique to ProcessWire... not in your face, but there to be easily found when you need it. I'm finding that to be the learning pattern with ProcessWire... first you have to conceive of the logic order of what it is you want to do, then go discover if there is a built in way of doing it... 9/10 there is! Much, much respect to the author.

Okay, the penny has dropped. ProcessWire is AMAZING.

Ah, wait a minute... I think the "Parent of selectable page(s)" was what I was missing. So, I set up a page called "Instruments", and then under that I create child pages named after the instruments... flute, violin, cello, etc. Am I barking up the wrong tree here, or...?

Okay, maybe I'm having one of those moments, but I can't work out how best to do this. I'm trying to put together a little music composition folio site. Basically, I have a page "works", using "work" template. That page can have children which use the template "work-entry". When I create a new work-entry page, apart from entering the usual title, subtitle, body, etc., I would like to have an "instrumentation" field where I can select from a list of instruments. So, I see there is a "Select Multiple" Inputfield which is descibed: "Select multiple items from a list". Sounds perfect. But... how to I make the items in that list, and how do I add that list to field? Do I create a whole load of pages (one for each instrument) and then make a a field with "page" as the field type? I don't know, that seems like I'm going down the wrong path... Any advice? What's the most elegant way of doing this?

"never ever" "absolutely necessary" "absolute UX nightmare" Woah! If there's one thing I've learned over the past few years of designing... there are no very few absolutes.

How's the new version of the shop going? I'm currently using Stripe, but with a third party cart/checkout app called SendOwl. It would be great, however, to bring everything under one roof, so to speak, and use PW for all my shop needs also. One burning question. I know you plan to support digital downloads, but will you also be allowing those downloadable files to be hosted on Amazon S3? If yes, I would probably weep with happiness Second burning question... it's sounds like this new shop module is not going to be a free module, right? Can you give any indication of price?

Is there a forum thread on this "next-gen" shop? I use Stripe at the moment and a third party cart/checkout solution. It would be great to have it all in the PW admin. EDIT: Ah, okay... found it buried late on in the Shop-For-Process wire page https://processwire.com/talk/topic/1732-shop-for-processwire-apeisa/page-8?hl=stripe

@LostKobrakai: I'll check that video out, thanks!

Although, if you like to copy and paste re-usable template fragments from site to site, being able to use page->httpUrl has it's merits. Actually, slightly OT, but that brings up another canonical question... how does one deal with https:// vs http:// in canonical? I mean, does that matter for SEO?

Good point.

I just wonder if that rubs against the grain of ProcessWire a bit...? I like the idea in ProcessWire that everything is relative and that you can just drag an installation to another folder (or, indeed, domain name), if you so desire.

Ah yeah, maybe. Although, it's quite a personal thing, so maybe not appropriate for the majority of users. (EDIT: but you or any mod... please feel free to move it if you like)

There's an option in the current .htaccess to forward to the www version of your site. But... I prefer a URLs without a www. However, I would still like said URLs to be accessible should someone type in the www sub-domain in their URL bar, or link to the "www version" of the URL. If you're like me, this could be a useful addition to the .htaccess file... # ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- # OPTIONAL: Redirect users to the non 'www.' version of the site (uncomment to enable). # For example: http://www.processwire.com/ would be redirected to http://processwire.com/ # ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- #RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www\. #RewriteCond %{HTTPS}s ^on(s)|off #RewriteCond http%1://%{HTTP_HOST} ^(https?://)(www\.)?(.+)$ #RewriteRule ^ %1%3%{REQUEST_URI} [R=301,L] For me, this is the simplest way to do things. It also means any auto-populated canonical tags, such as... <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo $page->httpUrl; ?>"> ...will never display the www version of your site. I know many of you will know this already, but I always forget exactly what to put in there, so this will come in useful for me and others in future, I hope! What are your thoughts on this? Some other solutions? I've heard about mod_alias also? How would that work in conjunction with ProcessWire? Would it be a better solution?

Hey Reno, I already posted here — https://processwire.com/talk/topic/7618-from-textpattern-to-processwire/page-3#entry73986 — but just found this thread. Your admin theme is really stupendous. Excellent work and a significant improvement over the default theme (which wasn't all that bad either).

Avatar added. Crisis averted

Thanks again and I totally hear what you're saying. Particularly these words... "The comment on the menu comes exactly from that, because the site is so positively minimalistic, and yes, because it has a print feeling (I'm a graphic designer by the way), somehow I felt that the menu brings too much animation to it." That's exactly true and I never thought of it like that. The animation element is almost at odds with the static print feel, almost too slick. I get that completely and I wonder if that's why I have sort of mixed feeling about sliding menus. Hmm. Food for thought. Thanks.

Installed your admin theme. First impression... love it! One tiny, teeny thing. I noticed the new default admin theme, under the setup tab, it has icons for templates and fields. The field icon is a single cube and the template icon is like a mini pyramid of cubes. I saw those and suddenly the concept of templates and fields and how they normally relate to one-another made perfect sense. On yours, they both have a little lightning bolt icon, which is cool, but I think the cube and pyramid cube thing is very clever and succinct visual cue. But, of course, that's not a major thing at all and what I really want to say is: yes, best looking admin theme of any CMS I have ever used, ever. Thanks and well done!

I'm totally up for a conversation about sliding navigation and if I'm coming across an defensive, that's not my intent. It's genuinely interesting to hear other people's views, and I was genuinely surprised to hear a few people mention uncertainty about the hidden nav. From my own view, I'm 80% sure it's still the right decision and keeps any single page super-minimal and focused on content. Take the About page, for example. I think it's nice to be on that page, and all you have at the top is MIRA OPALINSKA / About. It almost comes across like a printed page, and I like that about it. I think a menu and language selectors etc. would detract from the simplicity and elegance. On more ProcessWire specific stuff... I have now updated to PW 2.5. There was some compatibility issues with the Thumbnail module, so for now will just use the built in core functionality. Everything else seems to work very well. Although I did have to refresh the browser two or three times to get the admin to look right (probably the old CSS was cached). So, yeah... pretty seamless upgrade. But then I am only using 1 module now outside of core.

Thanks! It's funny, I didn't expect such a negative reaction from people to the menu. I totally hear what you're all saying, but it's sort of surprised me. It's interesting, because I wonder if it's a "developer" type reaction. I mean, would the reaction would be the same if you were just going onto the site as a normal person, browsing the site in a normal fashion. I think when you're in "developer mode" checking out a site, if you're anything like me, you're sort of jumping back and forward from page to page, seeing how things work, checking stuff out, using the menu probably way more than you normally would. Do you know what I mean? I think the average site visit is *click* to where I want to go, then read on that page for a while. *click* to another page. Read etc. Whereas, I'm almost certain all of you guys didn't bother to check any text and just clicked around to see how things look. I know that's what I do when I'm checking out a site design. The text might as well be Lorem Ipsum and I'd never even notice, ha ha! @onjegolders | BTW, just checked out Milktop... very slick... I like it! (although, I didn't read any text )

Hey Ryan. I came across this post looking for how to clear image cache. I wonder, did this "image cache clear" module ever come to light?