CMS Made Simple Forums
https://forum.cmsmadesimple.org/

CMS Made Simple 2.0 (not 1.7) is in development
https://forum.cmsmadesimple.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=35894
Page 4 of 11

Author:  Simon66 [ Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: CMS Made Simple 1.7 is in development

Thanks for the heads up about all the yummy goodness of 1.7. Drooling has commenced.

One small question though...
Will 1.7 allow the Smarty {include} to be used in templates, to include template bits like 'headers' and 'footers', for leaner templates with less repetition?

Simon66

Author:  geeves [ Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: CMS Made Simple 1.7 is in development

Why use {include} when there is {global_content}?

Author:  Simon66 [ Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: CMS Made Simple 1.7 is in development

If I allow my client access to Global Content Blocks I don't want them to have access to bits of the template.
I would prefer all unchangable template elements to be kept in 'templates' which only designers and developers have permissions to access.

I do use a GCB as the footer on all of my sites, but if I try to export from the Theme Manager it leaves out the GCB, which is another reason not to use GCBs more often in templates.

GCBs are brilliant for content, but I like to keep content and templates separate.

Just My 2cents.

Simon66

[EDIT] I also use them for editable content in templates, just not for template elements.

Author:  faglork [ Wed Aug 19, 2009 10:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: CMS Made Simple 1.7 is in development

geeves \geeves:
+1 vote for style drop down. Style dropdown is much MUCH more important than alignment tools which just add inline styles to elements to align them. CSS classes should be used for things like alignment of text and images:

Inline styles are never okay. The goal with (x)html / css development is to separate content from presentation. Well, let's start trying to make that separation a goal for v1.7.


++ ... a clean separation  is IMO very important. 

Cheers,
Alex

Author:  Solutic [ Wed Aug 19, 2009 11:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: CMS Made Simple 1.7 is in development

calguy1000 \calguy1000:
 - We will be requiring PHP 5.2+, and forever breaking PHP4 support.


Hi,

First of all, thanks for all this excellent job!
I have a question, will CMS MS be compatible also with PHP 5.0.0 and more ?
I have some website with some older version of PHP 5

Thank you for the answer!

Author:  calguy1000 [ Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CMS Made Simple 1.7 is in development

@Solutic
CMS 1.7 will support php 5.2+

@others
The style dropdown was voted out of microtiny intentionally.  it won't be in.

Author:  geeves [ Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CMS Made Simple 1.7 is in development

What possible reason would there be NOT to include the style dropdown? I think a better explanation than 'it got less votes than something else' is warranted.

Inline styles are fundamentally wrong and against best practices. It is imperative that there is a clear separation between the sematic and the aesthetic.

I really hate having to use TinyMCE in the first place, but now we're on the verge of having something clean and simple available with the advent of microtiny and its already being stuffed up!

Author:  Simon66 [ Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CMS Made Simple 1.7 is in development

I have to agree - the styles dropdown and the SelfLink button are the standout features of TinyMCE. They really make things easy for my clients and staff.

Will begging, pleading and fawning make any difference?

Simon66

[I do understand that I'll be able to use the full editor as a separatre module, but the microtiny is such a good idea, that with styles it would be everything any of my clients would ever need.]

Author:  Sonya [ Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CMS Made Simple 1.7 is in development

Simon66 \Simon66:
Will begging, pleading and fawning make any difference?


My guess - there are more developers in the dev team and few designers. Developers are not interested in designer stuff :) but programming functions. Therefore designers cannot push something by simple voting and are always overruled :)

Author:  calguy1000 [ Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CMS Made Simple 1.7 is in development

\$1:
My guess - there are more developers in the dev team and few designers. Developers are not interested in designer stuff Smiley but programming functions. Therefore designers cannot push something by simple voting and are always overruled


No, it's about focus on our core intentions:
a) separating content from design as much as possible
b) creating a tool where customers (the average receptionist, or spouse) can easily update content without messing up the look and feel of the site.    Edit:  and without having to memorize a bunch of 'rules'
c) creating a small easy to use, lightweight editor.   We wanted to get rid of a wysiwyg all together, and just go with a basic html or bbcode editor.  (something like the default html editor in wordpress) but we compromised.

A small editor with just a few limited options (bold/italics/underline, h1 thru h5, code and blockquote), and a properly configured stylesheet and template will allow the average end user to do 95% of what they need to do.

Designers should know HTML, and CSS, and know about the concept of separating design from content.  If they need a wysiwyg with 30 block styles in the list so that they can layout a page properly, they need to go back to school IMHO (I've edited a few sites built by other people where this was the case, the designer didn't have a real clue about what he was doing).   Otherwise, they can install and configure the full tinymce and muck along like they always did.

Author:  Pierre M. [ Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: CMS Made Simple 1.7 is in development

Hello all,

thanks for the news about 1.7dev.

calguy1000 \calguy1000:
No, the javascript calls will not AUTOMATICALLY be included in every frontend page.  There'll be a fair bit of stuff in there, so most people wouldn't want ALL that javascript included automatically.  So you'll either have to include it manually with the appropriate