Docs site refresh effort

Destry · 2020-12-10 18:03:49

I think I like and agree with all that.

One thing here..

this mix of title formats:

Content: managing articles, images, files and links

Websites: building a simple blog, with comments

Websites: building a photoblog

Websites: building a corporate site

Extending a site with plugins: installing and upgrading

Skinning the back-end: custom admin themes

Plugins: creating and developing

I like the mix, and I agree not one pattern will work for every title (so rules shouldn’t be too rigid, in fact). But with respect to the three starting with ‘Websites:’, I’m easily seeing a series heading on those instead that pulls the repetitive part out, for example:

Website types

Custom blog (site-blog.md)
Mom and pop e-shop (site-eshop.md)
Corporate headquarters (site-corporate.md)
Nonprofit (site-nonprofit.md)
. . .

But does that then leave titles too concise and relying on the header?

That probably also means re-thinking the Basics/More organization of index2, but that might have been inevitable anyway. ‘Basics’ might still be good as a first list in each section, but the ‘More’ items could be re-thought for breaking out into two or three specific groupings?

Let’s see what other fish bite and then aim for some constructive advice to update the collab doc with. The index architecture is a related but different discussion, perhaps.

Last edited by Destry (2020-12-10 18:10:00)

Destry · 2020-12-11 10:07:24

I am now beginning work on the project-level editorial style guide. It’s only 5+ years overdue.

I will keep fine-tuning the collaboration doc as I go, so the previous conversation on titles is still valid.

Last edited by Destry (2020-12-11 10:08:18)

gaekwad · 2020-12-23 09:32:26

I’ve started the ball rolling with a tags schedule: forum.textpattern.com/viewtopic.php?pid=327758

Comments and feedback welcome.

Bloke · 2021-01-20 12:02:47

Shall we start on the tags docs? A week or so late, but y’know… posted/modified/expires shouldn’t be too hard as they’ve not changed much over the years.

Bloke · 2021-01-20 12:11:28

I’m aware that we’ll need to tweak things slightly, btw. Currently (as of Txp 4.8.4) break is a per-tag attribute, and is thus included in the common presentational atributes include file. As of 4.8.5 due imminently, break becomes global so it’ll have to move to the global atts include file.

That means any tags we link with common presentational attributes will need their break="" argument removing. Currently, no biggie, as the only tag that uses the new includes is the section_list tag.

I’m wondering given the imminent nature of 4.8.5 whether to add break to the global atts now to save us having to revisit the tags next week. It’s kinda naughty to document something that’s not in a release yet but, y’know, saved effort and all that. Thoughts?

gaekwad · 2021-01-20 13:15:37

Sorry I dropped this, real life stuff got in the way and threw me off course a bit.

Bloke wrote #328259:

Currently (as of Txp 4.8.4) break is a per-tag attribute, and is thus included in the common presentational atributes include file. As of 4.8.5 due imminently, break becomes global so it’ll have to move to the global atts include file.

[…]

It’s kinda naughty to document something that’s not in a release yet but, y’know, saved effort and all that. Thoughts?

+1 for doing it. No harm in doing it now and noting that changes happened in 4.8.5, since there will inevitably be a long tail of people running pre-4.8.5 anyway.

Bloke · 2021-01-20 15:56:18

Oki doke, done. Just gotta decide what the best default value is for break. Traditionally it’s been ‘br’ but now it’s global I’m not so sure if that’s still the case, as it may be unset by default.

etc · 2021-01-20 21:37:08

Bloke wrote #328261:

Just gotta decide what the best default value is for break. Traditionally it’s been ‘br’ but now it’s global I’m not so sure if that’s still the case, as it may be unset by default.

We should first agree on what the global break should do. For example, in <txp:site_name break="br" />?

colak · 2021-01-21 07:38:12

li is a more common break for menus such as section_list and related_articles but I think that if the attribute becomes global, unset will be the list invasive.

Re Oleg’s very valid comment. I can see issues with a number of tags such as txp:die, if_yield, in fact most of the if_ tags, etc. I’m wondering if tags could be divided into front end presentation for the ones which actually render some content, and conditional for the ones that test the context. site_name is a strange hybrid tag which can be used both in the head and the body of an article, txp:css though is the one which might help into making the decision.

etc · 2021-01-21 09:16:15

colak wrote #328295:

li is a more common break for menus such as section_list and related_articles but I think that if the attribute becomes global, unset will be the list invasive.

… I’m wondering if tags could be divided into front end presentation for the ones which actually render some content, and conditional for the ones that test the context.

Global attributes have no default value, one must call them explicitly. Also, they are (mostly) tag-agnostic. Actually, global break has little value per se: why would one want to break the site name? It was introduced mainly as a counterpart to fields="list(field)" article attribute. You can try this example with and without wraptag="ul" break="li" attributes to see how they work:

<txp:article_custom fields="authorid, list(title)">
    <h3><txp:author /></h3>
    <txp:title wraptag="ul" break="li" />
</txp:article_custom>

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#41 2020-12-10 18:03:49

Re: Docs site refresh effort

Website types

#42 2020-12-11 10:07:24

Re: Docs site refresh effort

#43 2020-12-23 09:32:26

Re: Docs site refresh effort

#44 2021-01-20 12:02:47

Re: Docs site refresh effort

#45 2021-01-20 12:11:28

Re: Docs site refresh effort

#46 2021-01-20 13:15:37

Re: Docs site refresh effort

Bloke wrote #328259:

#47 2021-01-20 15:56:18

Re: Docs site refresh effort

#48 2021-01-20 21:37:08

Re: Docs site refresh effort

Bloke wrote #328261:

#49 2021-01-21 07:38:12

Re: Docs site refresh effort

#50 2021-01-21 09:16:15

Re: Docs site refresh effort

colak wrote #328295:

Board footer