Gazley

Thanks Sergio!

Been looking at Svelte/Kit - really, really nice. Thanks again for pointing this out. It's totally within reach if you have some standard JS ability but it's squarely within a new development paradigm that has the possibility of making me feel, erm, "modern" again! Cheers :)

Thanks @diogo - that's great feedback and advice. To be honest, PW is such a great system, it's a really hard act to follow, particularly with the modules and the whole development ethos behind it. I suppose it's a case of the anticipation of a learning curve and whether or not it's timely to look at a different technology that may offer more general opportunities as opposed to whether something is better or worse than PW. I'll head over to svelte and take a good look. Cheers buddy!

Hi all, I've not used PW for a few years. In fact, I haven't developed for a few years. I might have a requirement to get back in to developing (a new project in particular) and when I was last coding with a vengeance, Gatsby wasn't around (AFAIK) and React was in its infancy so, circa 2015. At this stage, I feel like an amateur again so, getting back into PW will have some overhead. It begs the question, is something like Gatsby worth looking at? I've checked the Gatsby docs. It looks like more work all round, perhaps more dev team-oriented but, using "modern" tech under the hood. Any thoughts?

Thanks diogo. Is it a service to install PW on a host of your choice or, do they provide hosting too? I checked the page but could quite work out the extent if what they do. Cheers.

Hi there! It's been a long time since I've been here. I've not developed for a good few years. My son has asked if I can create him a website for his personal training service. I used to have a Linode to host sites but I've not had that for a while. Also, it was a bit problematic being responsible for the web server and general setup. I wondered what the best/easiest way is to quickly establish hosting without the hassle? Something where the setup and PW installation is automatically handled? Any ideas or suggestions would be very much appreciated! ? Cheers.

Hi @mciccone - I saw that myself but, I couldn't get it to work at all. After your suggestion, I just tried it again and still, no joy. Dunno <shrug> If you have been able to make that work, I'd be interested to see the markup. For now, @3fingers approach works fine but, I just wondered whether there is a "definitive" approach to this recommended by UIKit or, whether it's one of those cases where there is just more than one way to "skin a cat", so to speak! Thanks for the heads-up!

@3fingers - awesome! Thanks for the heads-up. So simple when you know how!

Hi there, Just started with UIKit3. When marking up a grid, the gutter defaults to medium. If I add uk-child-width-1-3, my items wrap nicely but, whilst they are separated by the gutter, they sit on top of each other without gutter/margin in the vertical. What is the best approach to have equal space both horizontally and vertically with a grid's child items. Also, what is the best approach to reducing that space at smaller breakpoints? Many thanks!

Thank you @abdus - you're the man!

Hello @abdus - many thanks for your code and I understand where you are coming from with this. What I am basically trying to understand is with respect to the image represented by $page->images->first, which image from my example scenario would I put into ProcessWire in the first place - gazley_flat.jpg or gazley_web.jpg? I hope I'm making some sense here

Hi there, I'm getting reasonably familiar with the approach of using srcset and sizes. However, I'm still somewhat confused about the base/reference image to use in PW. So, here's my use-case: I have an image in Photoshop that has been airbrushed and post-processed called gazley.psd. The layers are flattened into a JPEG that may be 15 -> 30 mb in size and the pixel width may be circa 3000, so now, we have gazley_flat.jpg, not web optimized. If I save that image "for web", it might reduce the image size by some 50% giving me gazley_web.jpg. However, this is obviously still way too big to use in an image tag! So, I might want to use an AR of 3:4 where the maximum rendered image will only ever be, say, 960px wide. However, I need 2x and 3x density depending on the device/screen that the image is ultimately rendered on. Considering the above requirement/use-case, what would be the correct approach to give me what I need? Many thanks!

@Sanyaissues - pretty nice too! Thanks for pointing this out. So many cool solutions

Hey @abdus, hope you're well. Thanks also for pointing me to these great javascripts I also didn't know about these little beauties either. I now have plenty to work with. I appreciate the heads-up! Cheers!

Hi @DaveP - thanks so much for pointing me towards Intercooler! It looks awesome and I hadn't previously heard of it