diogo

Robert, I noticed that you used shorthand syntax on only one place of your template <?= $page->rootParent->title; ?> I would change that to the complete syntax, just in case the server doesn't support the previous. Or, since in PHP 5.4, the shorthand syntax will always be activated, I would change all the others to <? include "blocks/htmlhead.inc"; ?>

Sounds great but they aren't planning to ship it with ubuntu 12.04

You're completely free to do it the way you want. Check this post where people discuss other ways of organizing templates and where Ryan explains why this is the chosen form for the default install http://processwire.com/talk/topic/740-a-different-way-of-using-templates-delegate-approach/page__fromsearch__1

I meant, replacing wire('pages')->get(1187)->url for $wire->pages->get(1187)->url But I thought you where bootstrapping PW by including the index file. In this case, maybe you can add some parameters to the function, and put those calls there.

Should work... did you try also with $wire->pages?

I'm not on my computer, so I can't test it. No screenshots?

It works great Ryan! I'm in love with this new feature! Repeated fields and field-template context, used in the right amount, are extremely powerful for creating a friendly edit environment. I really think this brings PW to a new dimension

Just tried it, it works well. easy and simple!

I hope this will keep happening, also with modules. These things tend to loose their usefulness when they start being to many and with indistinguishable quality. This is one of the problems with projects that have grown too much.

I like how they implemented this on symphony (ya again, i know). On the downloads section of the site they have extensions and utilities. Utilities would be more or less this kind of snippets. http://symphony-cms.com/download/xslt-utilities/

I also get an error with Chrome on Ubuntu

This is a pity, but PW was actually listed there as one of the 3 best CMS for some time, until it got hundreds of automatic bad votes, wish took it to the bottom. Ryan decided to ask them to remove it from their list, until the voting system becomes more reliable

If your not using git, yes. only the wire folder though

:D EDIT: It's working well now, Ryan!

WillyC, maybe you can make some IKEA like instructions for this

Funny, I tested the image on two different browsers, and it worked... and on firefox I'm not logged in to the service. Just updated the link above.

Mayday!! Some floats need to be cleared here! hm... how do I attach an image here?? oh, apparently I'm also not allowed to embed and image without extension... Pete, help! ...i will just link to it: https://lh4.googleus...JdizWZlDsybcyIw Updated link: https://docs.google....tTWZ3SUN6TmNBQQ EDIT: Now I see the attach files option on the reply full editor... I swear it wasn't there when I wanted to attach the above image!

I've never heard of oEmbed before, but it looks like it would be a good solution to make an easy fieldtype for videos. http://oembed.com/ There are also some alternatives based on it. http://noembed.com/ http://autoembed.com (this one looks nice, but it's only free for personal use)

Great site Alex! And great work also! I love the "showcase" poster! I posted it on my blog http://lightgreen.tumblr.com/. Hope it's ok with you

Bingo

If your content structure is well thought, you will automatically have a logical structure for the frontend as well as for the backend. What I'm saying is that you don't really have to think about it as "navigation1" and "navigation2", but as "products" and "articles" instead.

I would say that you can compare it with the separation of semantic markup and css, the tree structure should reflect the content logic and not the navigation. imagine that one day you want to change the way the content is presented on the webpage... that all the navigation would be rethinked... with this structure, you would have to keep the tree reflecting something that doesn't corresponds to the real situation. Best, would be to organize the tree by content logic, and make the navigation work as you want on templates.

I agree with the others that this is not the right approach. But still, this can be answered, and there is a way around: The name of the page on the tree is defined by the title, while the url segment is defined by the name. So, this would be as easy as having different name and title.

unless they decide to quote some funny code that they have seen on a blog

Tú trabajo, you mean