Mustafa-Online

Gutenberg For ProcessWire ?!

Recommended Posts

Gutenberg is.. okay. It's getting mixed reviews https://en-gb.wordpress.org/plugins/gutenberg/#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 - https://docs.statamic.com/fieldtypes/bard

  • 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 http://editor.ory.am/

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 2

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 3

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 11

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) https://toolset.com/2018/11/toolsets-plans-for-wordpress-5-0-and-gutenberg/

TL;DR:

Quote

...
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 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2018 at 5:25 PM, Ivan Gretsky said:

still think Repeater Matrix should be PageTable Matrix

THIS!!!!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Everyone!

I'm new here, just signed up.
I've discovered PW few days ago (what a shame...) and I'm angry for myself that I lost several years of my life...

I'm a homegrown webdeveloper since 2005, started from pure HTML, then e107, Textpattern and from 2008 I work(ed) only with WordPress.
I've made over a hundred of sites. Most of them are simple blogs but my main site is quite large (with over a 10k entries and over 100k of media).

It's outdated a little bit so I was planning to modify and refresh it lately but then... Gutenberg happened.
Gutenberg as an editor is unintuitive, buggy, produces massive problems and it's incompatibile with most of the things I'm using
(it seems to be the same story for hundreds of websites built on WP).
And though the whole WP community is frustrated and angry, it's been forced with WP 5.0 as the beginning of rebuilding WP as a platform into... hmm... next Wix?

I was trying to discuss - my comments were deleted and my account has been blocked (as many others).
After 8 years of developing WP...

Well... I've frozen the site for updates and started looking elswhere.
I have few advanced demands so tried Drupal, then played a little with Craft, Codeigniter and Laravel (I'm not a programmer per se).
And after few recommendations I've finally found You.

Guys... I'm so thrilled and emotional. I can't stop reading and following tutorials on localhost.
PW is THE TOOL I was searching my whole life!
I'm going to study everything very carefully and next year I'm going to rebuild slowly (there's no rush) my main site with PW.

Back to Gutenberg:
I understand where it aims to be and what it tries to accomplish BUT this is wrong on so many levels.
As far as I can see, a barebone PW installation is far more flexible and useful then WP with 30 plugins.
And obviously you know it perfectly.
So I'm begging you: no Gutenberg here... 😉

Cheers to Ryan and Everyone!
Greetings from Poland!

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @phoros and welcome to the forum,

interesting read!

13 minutes ago, phoros said:

Gutenberg as an editor is unintuitive, buggy, produces massive problems and it's incompatibile with most of the things I'm using
(it seems to be the same story for hundreds of websites built on WP).
And though the whole WP community is frustrated and angry, it's been forced with WP 5.0 as the beginning of rebuilding WP as a platform into... hmm... next Wix?

I was trying to discuss - my comments were deleted and my account has been blocked (as many others).
After 8 years of developing WP...

Would be interested what your concerns have been. I love PW for many reasons, but I've also come across situations where I wished there was some kind of content-builder to give editors more flexibility than just different fields (where PW is awesome). There are several approaches for that already and I've built something like this several times already, but it still does not feel right, because you always have to start from scratch.

Seeing all those fance marketing screencasts about wordpress click-click magic I got a little frustrated from time to time, because building such functionality in pw needs a lot of time and effort - which means lots of costs and a disadvantage in terms of business.

So I'd be happy to hear some more details about the problems that gutenberg brings in. Thx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi @bernhard!

Gutenberg in Wordpress is a dual misconception:

  • Wordpress is known as a blog platform. Yes, you can extend it massively and use it for many different projects but in the end it's mostly about operating with text. It's usually enriched with images and embeds but it's still an article, news, etc. So many authors for so many years just copied and pasted their texts, added few media and with 2-3 clicks published it. Now, doing this simple task with Gutenberg is insanely uneffective: instead one simple menu in editor there are several (hidden) menus everywhere (in every block). And EVERYTHING is a block now - a title, a paragraph, an image, a quote and so on (imagine the amount of additional code it generates!). You have to do absurdly much more things to get the same result and you have to spend much more time to do the simplest task.
  • So maybe Gutenberg is for designers rather? If it's true and if this was the idea (to simplify building content) - there are so many so much better WP site builders and themes (to do so) FOR YEARS! Anybody who wants a one-page site or portfolio just picks up a theme and few plugins and voila. The core blogging mechanism stays safe and ready when necessary.

I can understand that Matt, Automattic and the dev-deciders want to turn with WP elsewhere and change the character/purpose of the platform. Their choice (though the style they're doing that is embarrassing). But cutting out all those (millions?) of websites using WP for TEXT PUBLISHING and trying to convince the whole world that Gutenberg is better tool to write an article than TinyMCE or CKEditor is as funny as idiotic.

From practical point of view, Gutenberg is incompatible with so many plugins and themes (used stably for years!) that it broke hundreds (thousands?) of websites. Blank sites, errors, bugs everywhere AND in many cases people have no idea where is a problem and what to fix. At my site (mentioned above) I have 50 plugins. Half of them doesn't work or generates errors with Gutenberg. Just take a look at the reviews of Gutenberg (and their dates!) to catch the disaster happening there.

I know perfectly from my own experience how such a "click click drag-and-drop magic" approach can be tempting.
Probably even using PW at some point (it's still ahead of me!).
But it's the whole different way and phillosophy of creating (fast) content. There are all those Wix, Weebly, Spacesqare and Mobirise builders for that.
WordPress as it was thought in the beginning shoudn't go that way (that 30% of web share will fall quickly).

  • Like 4

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?