Joss

There are two ways First of all, each field has a description and these can be changed on a Template to template basis. Secondly, Soma has put together a very useful module that simply adds a help tab to templates if an associated help files is created. This would just be a file with notes for the template written out as html. Full instructions are with the module. http://modules.processwire.com/modules/template-notes/ I have used this a couple of times now and the clients really like it. Basically, I write the fuller instructions in the help file, including outside references if needed, like to their own company policy or the TinyMCE manual and also any notes about style or SEO considerations and so on. I then only use the description fields as very short reminders, if at all. The resulting forms are much cleaner and yet the client has lots of information at their disposal.

No need to fake - better to play it straight. And there is no evidence anyone else is faking or not. Just supposition, which is not exactly accurate ERP may just be waiting to do a last minute rush, of course!

I have used Wordpress since it first came out, but it was years till I registered with their community. I think the two main places for interaction for many apps these days is Facebook and Twitter rather than their own forums. Really it would be nice to link the three together here so that just by visiting this forum, it also answers any twitter posts or Facebook posts while using the same interface. Likewise, any new post on here, plus answers, are put up as conversations on twitter and/or facebook (albeit in truncated form with links. That way people can choose the interface they want while centralising all the information.

I see that our lead has been cut down to just a handful of votes now... If you haven't voted yet - now would be nice!

Hey, I have to check in the morning to make sure I still have the one I was born with - wouldn't want to make it more complicated!!

You can vote more than once?

We have no way of knowing that they are using fake votes and so should not make that accusation. We are not talking about a huge amount of votes here for anyone.

I have always secured xampp mysql with a password as a matter of course. Habit really.

Just for interest, how would one add a colour scheme, as opposed to modifying one of the existing ones? I noticed the selector, but did not see how that relates to the css files (not that I looked that closely). It would be also interesting if that could link to a dedicated main.js for each colour scheme, which just allows a bit of fine tuning.

Looks like they have rallied the troops!

I used to work with this marvellous fellow called Erkki Toivanen - we made radio programmes for Finnish Broadcasting. Some of them were narratives about Opera others were sound effect laden walks through great cities and their culture. He and I spent way too many hours on these programmes, had far too much fun and suffered frequently from arguments with the broadcasters over the size of the bill. I have never made it to Finland, but I rather enjoyed that once a month a little bit of Finland blew into the studio!

One thing I think is important is that all of this advanced back-office functionality needs to be modular - for most sites out there none of this is needed, but for those that benefit from this level of complex management, offering a full solution is quite a game changer. Hey, I talk to myself all the time - or is that not the same problem??

Apeisa Just as an offshoot of your user groups ... It would make sense that if a user group is responsible for only one part of a site, that on the Pages page of the admin, they only see the bits of the site they are responsible for. In a very complicated site structure, this would make navigation and administration far more logical and has offers the nice comforting psychological aspect of logging in straight to your area of concern. There are two ways of displaying this, as far as I can see. If your group were responsible for a clear branch of the page tree, then "home" would be replaced with the parent where your responsibility lay, However, if you belong to more than one group or if your group is responsible for more than one branch, then your display of pages would have to start at the highest common point to cover all those trees. Alternatively, (and I think this would look less messy) you would display the list of parents for each branch (or point down the branch) for which that group is responsible. So, these parents would be listed artificially at the same level, even though in reality, they may be all over the place in the hierarchy. This would need to be an optional system (perhaps an extra module) since in a simpler site it may be preferable to lay everything out logically and just not have some sections accessible to some groups/people

And, this way of storing information seems to be wonderfully quick and highly indexable! (is that a word?)

Apeisa - yes, it is a bit of an overwhelming solution, but the point is that it has structural merit, even if not all of it is adopted. With groups, yes, you should have internal structures. In liferay, they have certain built in roles that can just be applied to an organisation or site (or a group in your case). So, you would have Admin, Manager, Moderator, User, Guest roles that only work within a specific group. You would give these some logical default permissions so that people can use these out of the box, but the roles can also be edited or new roles created. I don't actually like the way they name them - it makes everything sound like a techy forum, and I suspect that puts some clients off. I would rather that they either reflected the hierarchy of a publishing house (Managing Editor, Editor, Sub Editor, Writer) for some uses or a standard company structure for others. But that is just me and names can easily be changed! Adding the idea of scope to your system covers all of this of course - if you can define scope for a particular role (global, group, whatever) then that allows a huge amount of variation. So a role would have Group scope - that means it only applies in the context of a group. It also has a flag to define WHICH group it specifically applies to. As for groups within groups, I think that would blow most peoples heads off as the normal way of structuring a PW installation does not demand it. However, if in the future you are running multiple installations, then this comes into play. So, for instance, the over-arching installation would have permissions covering all groups, but groups can install unique installations of PW (running on the same database), and these installations can in turn have their own groups. But lets not go there yet!

You are also hosting in the US with One? If it is for a German market you should really host in Germany, or at least in Europe. We have a few German, Dutch and Swiss users here - I am sure they know of reliable hosts. I also use CloudFlare who have data centres in Frankfurt among other places - that can speed things up.

I should point out that when I looked at your page it loaded pretty quickly, to be honest.

I notice that you have JQuery called in the head of your page - the same with main.js. That means that the page is having to load the JQuery library in full before it can even get going with the rest of your page Moving those to the end of the page would speed things up a bit.

I think there is a good chance - with a little bit of energy. But also this has been no bad publicity in any case. I have myself clicked on a few of the other candidates that I have never heard of to find out a little more (especially ones that are not CMSs), and I imagine that some have clicked on PW for the same reason.

Quite probably true. And if in doubt, shout - I can make good spin out of almost anything Silk purses anyone? (shoves deaf pig out of sight)

I don't see any malice here - just a playful comment that only references PW because we are leading in this little race. If it had been someone else, then PW would not have been mentioned. Certainly not worth beating up the MODX chaps over - probably a nice enough bunch!

I have now put mine on github and it includes the little change to the menu https://github.com/jsanglier/foundwire/

Looking more closely, there is this box shadow which is actually used in foundation to create the menu icon, but seems to adding an unwanted additional effect on the word "menu" which is wrapped in a span (I just copied this bit of code) Removing the span from round Menu resolves the issue. I will update the download later.

@adrian It looks like when the scss is changed, something is not updating properly. I didn't overwrite any of the css, just changed the primary bar colour in the related scss file, so this may be an error somewhere in the existing markup.

Oh, I never intentionally middle click - probably my upbringing.