Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About neotoxic

  • Rank
    Jr. Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Cambridge, England
  1. Oh I agree.. whilst I am sympathetic to the sentiment expressed in that article, I think there revolution is just one of semantics.But the idea that the components are all individual applications is an interesting one, and as I say not dissimilar to how ProcessWire delivers its infrastructure.
  2. I found this article, which whilst I don't agree with, think it make some interesting points. Then notion that the application is an API and the communication with the various elements is that of independent applications is an interesting one that has parallels with ProcessWire I think. I was wondering what your thoughts were. http://labs.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/the-twilight-of-the-cms.php
  3. Firstly I just wanted to add a point for clarity. When I said in my previous post " Allowing PW's API to be extended to include tools that mine the data of these other applications." I meant of course 'Allowing PW's API to be extended through the use of modules to include tools that mine the data of these other applications.' You are absolutely right Apeisa. The downside of the playing well with others approach is that others don't often play well with others. Our theoretical bridging modules, could become ineffective when the bridged software rewrites its database, API, or process. Maintaining a vast array of bridging modules would then become an exercise in 'Painting the Forth Bridge' (which insistently is an erroneous expression, but not a bad pun ). However rather than attempting to bridge any and all software, what I would suggest is that we approach projects that would equally benefit from the alliance. I have seen many forums start to try and build CMS features on top of their forum platform. The exact same flawed evolution that I am suggesting PW avoids, only coming form the other direction. Clearly they recognise that CMS features would make their forum software a more viable proposition, just as having a well integrated forum may help some PW projects. What I would like to suggest is a program of brining together key Open Source partners, a kind of 'Plays well with ProcessWire' campaign. Be picking only a select number of key partners we prevent the need to build an ever increasing, and less well maintained collection for bridging modules. The PW approved Forum, Gallery, Social platforms etc would allow each project to benefit not only from a tight well maintained and well integrated CMS, but also from all the other platforms that also can be integrated to the PW. A forum that needs a Gallery for example can use PW to implement both features. The choice of project that is approached to 'Play well with ProcessWire' would be critical. Clearly well written and maintained open source projects. Projects that deliver a single feature well, and don't themselves succumb to the 'all things to all people' approach. As a point of interest the reason I liked FluxBB is there list of UnFeatures (http://fluxbb.org/docs/unfeatures). Clearly anyone should be able to write any kind of integration model, and I hope people do. But recognising strategic partners and working with them to the benefit of both projects seems to be to be an interesting idea.
  4. I agree with you regarding the forum software, and it got me thinking about how often we see the wheel re-invented when it comes to internet software.CMS developers seem to get driven by there users to make their software be all things to all people.It needs to have a forum, gallery, social media features, contact management features, project workflow features, it needs to wash my cloths and make me a coffee in the morning. I say let PW be good at what it dose, keep it simple and powerful, and rather than make it all things to all people, allow it to play well with others. Creating Integration modules to bridge the gap between PW and other software seems to be way forward. Allowing PW users to become forum members, gallery moderators or social media users as an extension of there role within PW. Allowing PW's API to be extended to include tools that mine the data of these other applications. Let PW stays good at what its good at what it dose, and play well with others. Also FWIW I ended up using FluxBB which seems to offer a clean and simple platform, predictably however it was a fork of another forum, PunBB.
  5. I have been playing the MMO Rift recently, and started a little Guild in the game. To help support the site I thought about building a site,to help the members get interact when not in the game. As it meant starting a new project I immaterially thought about using ProcessWire, but then started to wonder how I would build such a site. I would want the basic things any community site would want. A basic forum, user profiles along with roles and permissions. Has anyone approached this kind of project with PW?
  6. I recognised its not a primary concern, but in general the Admin interface works quite well via an iPad. The minimalist interface approach keeping things simple really helps. There are a few areas where there are things you can't do (dragging pages around the structure for example) but there majority of things work fine. Alternative mechanics could be added with a little jQuery and CSS. A CSS file to optimise the use of space, and to increase the sized of text and buttons to improve bother readability and usability and this would be very usable. It wouldn't take much more effort then to make it work on the iPhone. Anyone who has tried to use Wordpress's admin system on an iPhone or iPad will appreciate WP2's clean approach. As I say however, I am not suggesting this is urgent, but it would make for a nice high impact image fro the homepage, you know, the classic Desktop / iPad / iPhone image, all proudly showing there version of the admin interface.
  7. Awesome that seems to have fixed it, thank you Ryan. I thoughts it was much more to do with the nature of the 3G connection than the admin interface.
  8. I am starting to think this might be to do with the fact that I am using a 3G connection. The unexpected logging out seems to happen at odd times. I tired an alternate browser that worked fine for a while and then started to exhibit the same behaviour. Not sure if this is a problem that is unique to me. Not a huge issue, but with the prevalence of IOS and other mobile devices, it would be cool to have the admin system work over 3G. The light weight nature of the admin system really elands itself to mobile use, perhaps an alternate stylesheet could be employed to improve mobile usability but still it work well.
  9. Hello all, I am away at the moment and thought I would take the opportunity this morning to do a little ProcessWireing I am using my iPad (original) over 3G, and mostly it works fine, my only problem is when creating new pages the site drops me out to the login screen after the first page of the new page process. Anyone else able to replicate this problem? FYI I am using Textastic for iPad as my code editor, and its brilliant.
  10. I would like to suggest having a clean install option. I appreciate that a basic pre-installed site is a great way to understand how ProcessWire works, but when setting up a new projects from the latest build, removing that default sites pages, template associations, fields, template files and assets etc a pain. I have read about custom install profiles, but the options to start from a clean slate would almost always be useful. Is there a way to do this easily currently?
  11. Hello there, I am becoming a significant fan of ProcessWire and would like to give something back to the community. You can find out more about my and my skill set here http://www.william-owen.co.uk/. But in general, what is the best way to help out? Happy to do anything from graphic design / branding, coding, UX and interface development or even just being more active in the forum lol. Any thoughts? Will
  12. I am sorry for not replying sooner, I have been out of the office and my iPad doesn't seem to like this forum much. Thank you very much for adding the documentation Ryan, its very much appreciated. I have been spreading the word about ProcessWire to a number of UK business and there is a fair bit of interest. Great to see such a worth while project get more attention. Thanks again,
  13. I am really sorry if I am just missing something, but I can't find a page where the $config object is documented. Would have thought it would be here http://processwire.com/api/variables/ perhaps? I was specifically interested in knowing what URLs were made available under $config->urls
  14. It would seem that at the point of completing the form there are two types of actions that a use might legitimately want to choose, and these are common computing terms. Save. | Save and close. To provide optimal usability why no show two buttons and allow the user to select the action that suits there workflow. As a side note, I am becoming a huge fan of ProcessWire and have a great deal of faith in the development philosophy.
  15. Just a thought but given similarity of the task, the ability to export and install a site profile could be taken a step further to facilitate a nice clean and comprehensive back-up process. Allowing both a sites structure and or its data to be archived. Backed up and recovered as needed.
  • Create New...