Textpattern CMS support forum
You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Section Within Section
IF I want to create a section within a section, ie domain.com/about/contact/
How would I create the contact section hierarchical to the about section, it must show like that in the breadcrumbs. x
~ Cameron
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
Or use categories
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
please explain how you could use categories to create pages like this? x
~ Cameron
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
I think you could use a combination of categories and gbp_permanent_links to the create the URL scheme you are after.
Textpattern doesn’t have subsections so your options (as far as I know):
- the cnk_section_tree plugin
- using categories and gbp_permanent_links to rewrite the URLS to get what you’re after.
Last edited by renobird (2008-07-15 15:10:26)
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
Isn’t that a major flaw in Textpattern? Not being able to have subsections! :S
~ Cameron
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
I don’t really see it as a flaw – it’s just something that requires a plugin or a workaround for now.
That being said – I’ll be jumping up and down with the rest of the TXP community when subsections get added to the core. I’m pretty sure it’s in the crockery branch (just don’t plan on seeing that real soon).
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
Just saw this get posted – might be what you need.
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
Hmm all this just feels like a Hack! 4.1 DOES in fact have the feature I want, man I hope they get it out soon, its something so simple yet so important! Why in the hell this wasn’t added in the first place I have no idea? x
~ Cameron
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
driz
Somewhere along the way I picked up the impression that the original paradigm was modeled on a newpaper/magazine publishing. A newspaper generally has one level sections (business, sports, classifieds, etc). From that standpoint, it makes sense. You then use categories to subdivided.
For me, I don’t understand why categories options were limited to just two. But I know others get that part even if I don’t.
Last edited by maverick (2008-07-16 16:15:11)
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
Hmm but the categories are part of the content where as the sections are presentation side, modern-day websites are always more than one-level deep even simple blogs, sub-sections are an essential element. I hope they get it implemented into 4.0.8, 4.1 seems miles off. x
~ Cameron
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
I agree. I understand why the paradigm is the way it was, but I think there are modern paradigms that are more flexible.
driz wrote:
Hmm but the categories are part of the content where as the sections are presentation side, modern-day websites are always more than one-level deep even simple blogs, sub-sections are an essential element. I hope they get it implemented into 4.0.8, 4.1 seems miles off. x
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
driz wrote:
Hmm all this just feels like a Hack! 4.1 DOES in fact have the feature I want, man I hope they get it out soon, its something so simple yet so important! Why in the hell this wasn’t added in the first place I have no idea? x
Why in the hell this wasn’t added in the first place? I don’t know either, but I can live with it, that’s why I stick to TxP. If you can’t live without subsections, you will probably find another CMS which does what you need, or you will get comfortable to feel some plug-ins as a hack, or you will do something to make subsections real and as soon as possible , like, for example, offering thousands of dollars to the core dev team to pay for the subsections feature and then we all will enjoy it.
Or you can be patient and wait.
Why in the hell are you ranting like that? You already know it: no, there are no real subsections in TXP. And your insightful post won’t make it happen any time soon.
Why in the hell is there an “x” at the end of your posts? Is that some kind of obsessive-compulsive behavior?
TxP is a beautiful and useful thing, yet imperfect at the same time.
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
I wouldn’t call my post a rant! In fact the only ranting was one line, about 15 words to be exact, compared to your entire paragraph which is clearly a direct rant at me :S and to be fair bloody well rude!
My point was merely that sub-sections seem like the most obvious feature you would expect in a CMS, I can’t believe the dev’s added sections and never made it so you could choose parent sections. Almost feels like adding headers but not allowing sub-headers. And I don’t see how it would require me to donate thousands to implement such a feature? Isn’t this meant to be an Open-Source community based project? You make it sound like some grumpy sods who are pissed that they are having to even work on Textpattern core!
And as for the X! Is that such a big deal? Here in England, it’s common to end messages with some sort of remark, I guess in your country people don’t end messages politely? x
Last edited by driz (2008-07-17 02:02:01)
~ Cameron
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
driz wrote:
Isn’t this meant to be an Open-Source community based project?
Offline
Re: Section Within Section
driz wrote:
I wouldn’t call my post a rant! In fact the only ranting was one line, about 15 words to be exact, compared to your entire paragraph which is clearly a direct rant at me :S and to be fair bloody well rude!
Yes, and sorry, both my english and the fact that text communication strips out many layers about the mood, the intonation, etc, make it sound rude. In fact, it was rude, and it was a rant on you, so sorry again.
My point was merely that sub-sections seem like the most obvious feature you would expect in a CMS, I can’t believe the dev’s added sections and never made it so you could choose parent sections. Almost feels like adding headers but not allowing sub-headers.
As you already know, TxP doesn’t have built-in support for subsections, but on this thread you have been suggested some solutions (based on plugins) which, you said, smells like hacks.
Usually, plugins solutions aren’t hacks. Plugins add functionality. Yes, some functionality added by plugins should be in the core, many said. But they aren’t in the core yet, so then, you have the plugin, which adds the functionality you want.
I’ve successfully set a site to simulate subsections in the URL (using categories as subsections), using gbp_permanent_links plug-in.
- there is a chance that your site’s architecture is getting out of your hands. Are you sure you need /section/subsection/subsection/subsection/…?
- TxP is not the tool for the site you are aiming to build. TxP is meant to aim to small/medium sites, and I would bet at least 2-level of nesting sections are enough.
“If there isn’t a solution, why you complain? If there is a solution, why you complain?”.
And I don’t see how it would require me to donate thousands to implement such a feature? Isn’t this meant to be an Open-Source community based project? You make it sound like some grumpy sods who are pissed that they are having to even work on Textpattern core!
I’m guilty here. Ashamed too. Have never donated not even a dollar to TxP development, nor to a plug-in author. Here I am, trying to help (and some times, ranting) at forums.
Of course, helping and posting at forum don’t equal what money could do for devs and plugin developers, and open source software development in general.
But, again, there may be a chance that if you offer some money, someone (a core dev? a plugin dev? a dev who knows the in and outs of TxP?) will be willing to code the feature, and maybe it makes into the core and we all benefit from your action.
I think TxP devs are happy coders, coding what makes them happy, making improvements on each new version.
Maybe, subsections aren’t technically possible at all on TxP 4.0.x series.
And as for the X! Is that such a big deal? Here in England, it’s common to end messages with some sort of remark, I guess in your country people don’t end messages politely? x
I was just curious about that “x” at the end of each post. I asked the question in a similar way you asked your questions.
Offline