Recommended Posts

Gutenberg is.. okay. It's getting mixed reviews

The trouble is, it allows the user to do too much. It's trying to sit in the middle ground of a page builder and an editor. I think giving the user everything even if they don't need it isn't inline with ProcessWire. Things like being able to make columns etc. 

I actually much prefer Statamic's implementation with it's Bard field -

  • Like 3

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Tom. said:

I think giving the user everything even if they don't need it

You are absolutely right, but there must a way to restrict that behavior; for example: disable adding images in a video area ..etc / It doesn't have to be that cluttered.

I don't know if the Drupal guys are OK with it, I will give it a try.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, gmclelland said:

I saw somewhere on Twitter that someone mentioned they were doing something similar with Drupal and

That one looks really nice! First I thought I don't think ProcessWire is the right tool for such click-click-marketing sites, because its strength comes from the freedom of fields and querying them with the strong API, like $pages->find('template=xy,fieldx>50,fieldy<10'. But then I thought maybe it would be nice to have both combined. A site with custom templates & fields where we need more control over our data and an "ORY-template" (similar to the basic-page template) where the user can build its own totally flexible page. This could be great for landingpages.

So if anybody has the time to build it - go for it 🙂 

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/7/2018 at 12:24 PM, Tom. said:

I think giving the user everything even if they don't need it isn't inline with ProcessWire. Things like being able to make columns etc.

From a core development perspective I'm going to agree with this – but while the core probably shouldn't include a pre-built, "full featured" page builder (at least for the time being, since no one really knows what the future holds), there's no reason why third parties should be discouraged to create such tools. I also know for a fact that there'd be a market for that 🙂

  • Like 2

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still fairly new here having switched to using ProcessWire for pretty much every project (hence the frequent questions 😂 ) from Concrete5.

Concrete5 has had Gutenberg-esque block-based front-end editing for nearly 10 years longer than Wordpress. Although a finished site using C5 can look great for a site editor/frontend-only user with various drag-drop layout tools, we were finding c5 development had become very convoluted and was starting to make simple website projects unnecessarily complicated. C5's core weighs in at a hefty filesize too. This is why we started researching for alternatives and landed happily at ProcessWire.

I already find WP development unnecessarily convoluted, especially compared to the simplicity of ProcessWire. And with Gutenberg, I can only foresee the same sort of headaches ahead for the WP community that we were finding with C5 - namely conflicts between blocks and the core and frontend UI and your design style and functionality being dictated to by the CMS in order to work in the Gutenberg features.

Discovering ProcessWire has been a revelation for us - the clean API and design agnostic approach are making everything from simple website projects to complex web apps a breeze, with the added bonus of super simple frontend editing that not only wows client's used to site builder platforms but requires basically zero onboarding too.

I would urge anyone thinking of building out Gutenberg inspired modules for ProcessWire to consider the above comments to ensure that what makes ProcessWire special is retained.

  • Like 9

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

More on Gutenberg (it is a bird's-eye view article, and as such just a quick read)



The first version of WordPress and Gutenberg appears to be optimized for using Gutenberg to compose blog posts.
What we’d like to see in Gutenberg, which isn’t there yet, is mainly:

  • The ability to design templates, which will work similar to PHP templates, but with Gutenberg
  • The ability to launch Gutenberg editor for any content, not only the post body
  • The ability to insert dynamic values (fields and taxonomy) into block attributes


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Recently Bitrix (a popular commercial CMS here in Russia, known worldwide for its Bitrix24 CRM/PM/... solution) introduced similar functionality they called Site Constructor. This thing allows to build pages or parts of the pages from pre-defined blocks which can be static or dynamic. Site developer can style, modify or add their own blocks. They recommend this for landing pages for now, but are aiming to move all content management to those blocks. So there is some trend.

I actually do use (almost) the same approach in PW. Most of my pages have content-page template with content_blocks Repeater Matrix field holding most of the content in repeater items. What is missing in my solution is:

  • the easy ability to restrict the order, allowed types of those items (though possible with this module);
  • the ability to easily move/duplicate content blocks from project to project (still think Repeater Matrix should be PageTable Matrix);
  • the ability to easily preview the page built (like with this solution) in admin / edit it inline on the frontend.

I see this way of building content very flexible, but still somehow unfinished. We have all the parts in PW to build a full-blown page bulder that will not allow too much for ones that do not need it, but will make it easy to build something really complex and interesting without programming. But those parts are not yet combined in a polished solution. I would certainly like to have it in PW (as a PageTable-like PageBuilder FieldType/Inputfield combo, probably).

  • Like 2

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By MilenKo
      Hello guys.
      I've decided to get brave and start my first delayed output profile for a remake of my knowledge sharing profile. It went all.good so far but I decided to make it multilingual as to fit the users needs.
      For starters, added a field named: image_single and limited the input to one image as this would be used for the logo. Added.the markup to allow the front end editing (method D or direct edit tag to the <img>. After double clicking on the image, I see the pop-up showing up for a second and then closes. As far as there are no errors in the logs, I am a bit stuck to find the reason. I've read earlier that some users had issues with multilingual fields but could not find anything to point me to the right direction. Any ideas or suggestions?
    • By pwuser1
      Hi people I think I have seen them all but maybe I missed some of the just wanted to know what do you recommend for an editor with JQuery autocompletion or support? 
    • By abdus
      There's native `Fieldset in Tab` for creating editor tabs, but sometimes it could make more sense to put a field that's not directly related to `Content` into `Settings` or `Children` tab (such as for body class or some toggles that I see being used often). You can use the hook below to move fields between the tabs.

      // site/ready.php wire()->addHookAfter('ProcessPageEdit::buildForm', function (HookEvent $e) { // make sure we're editing a page and not a user if ($e->process != 'ProcessPageEdit') return; // RESTRICT BY TEMPLATE // $page = $e->object->getPage(); // if ($page->template != 'home') return; // RESTRICT BY ROLE // $user = $e->user; // if (!$user->hasRole('editor')) return; $form = $e->return; $contentTab = $form->children->get('id=ProcessPageEditContent'); $settingsTab = $form->children->get('id=ProcessPageEditSettings'); // $childrenTab = $form->children->get('id=ProcessPageEditChildren'); // if page template is set noSettings = true, $settings will not exist if (!$settingsTab) return; // MOVE TITLE FIELD TO SETTINGS TAB $title = $contentTab->get('title'); if (!$title) return; $contentTab->remove('title'); $settingsTab->prepend($title); });  
    • By hellomoto
      I have a manufacturers page select field and a dependent models one with pages of template `model` which are allowed children of pages with template `manufacturer`. So I have this as the findPagesCode for the models page options field:
      return $page->manufacturer->children(); However this requires the page be saved in order to display options. This is not ideal. 
      I have a singular autoload module with the following:
      public function init() { $this->pages->addHookAfter('render', $this, 'filterModels'); } public function filterModels($event) { $page = $event->arguments('page'); if($page->template != 'boat_vessel') return; $this->message("models filter"); } It's doing nothing. 
      I was thinking I could work out something with this example but I would need the above test to be working first anyway...
      $this->pages->addHookAfter('changed', function(HookEvent $event) { $page = $event->object; $change = $event->arguments(0); if($page->template == 'boat_vessel' && $change == 'manufacturer') { // execute some code } }); But what? How do I refresh the models field?
      Is there a way to do this in the field settings? I would think in the custom PHP textarea that `return $page->manufacturer->children();` would work but it doesn't. 
    • By Soma
      There's a permission for allowing editor to use the translator in PW 2.73. I could need this but it doesn't work. It shows the "Language" in the menu but when opening the page it says no entries to show. Anybody has some experience using the lang-edit permission for editor?