an attribute named "empty"

thebombsite · 2008-06-28 11:39:29

I remember “that click” from when I first started using TXP back in the “gamma” days. And I’m not complaining at all Robert. It’s just a lot of stuff to get your head around all in one go, particularly when you start combining the new “tag parser” abilities (which I do understand) with the new “variables” stuff. I don’t think I’ve fully understood half of this thread yet. Probably have to read through it 10 times before I get “that click” again. ;)

Last edited by thebombsite (2008-06-28 11:40:09)

wet · 2008-06-28 12:12:35

May I invite you to attempt a truly positive point of view:

With Textpattern 4.0.7, every single bit of your current knowledge stays valid.
Every novelty in Txp 4.0.7 simply expands the current feature set, there’s no change in existing behaviour.
You can continue to work as before and gradually apply new features, for instance swap out asy_wondertag for natively parsed attributes.

uli · 2008-06-28 12:35:38

Please don’t feel gnawed, Robert. The lack is on our side, we have to keep pace!

els · 2008-06-28 12:50:01

No complaints at all! I feel exactly the same as Stuart, Julián and Uli, but I just love steep learning curves, just have to shift to low gear ;)

BTW, just found this in an old weblog post:

The existing stable branch of Textpattern […] This necessitates very few features being added (as in, nothing large or sweeping […]

:))

wet · 2008-06-28 13:16:05

“Stable” is not “stagnant”. “Stable” means “we won’t break stuff (unless it promises loads of fun)”.

maverick · 2008-06-28 14:08:59

wet wrote:

Slightly progressive development: “Steep learing curve ahead!”

Me – I’m semi-lost, a tad confused, but loving it! Keep Bringing it on! :-P

maverick · 2008-06-28 14:14:15

wet wrote:

You can continue to work as before and gradually apply new features, for instance swap out asy_wondertag for natively parsed attributes.

I love the edge, so I have the latest svn up on several of my sites. Am using the new parser and nested tags in a very simple way at Missional (the site is a work-in-progress)

“Stable” means “we won’t break stuff (unless it promises loads of fun)”.

:D

Can’t make an omlette unless you break some eggs

Last edited by maverick (2008-06-28 16:03:27)

maniqui · 2008-06-28 15:51:42

Julián (I!) wrote:

but I can’t hear the “click” on my head yet. It’s like I have to re-learn everything each time.

Just to clarify: I wasn’t talking specifically about TXP here, nor about re-learning everything each time in TXP.
I was talking about my experience with general programming (Python, PHP, JS/jQuery).

wet wrote:

May I invite you to attempt a truly positive point of view:

I love all this new things wet and ruud (an other code contributors, if they exist) are adding to TXP.
I’m just bothering wet with my long and uncomprehensible dissection posts because I want to be prepared when the time comes. I want to hear that “click” (music to my ears) again.

uli · 2008-06-28 16:14:05

maniqui wrote:

but I can’t hear the “click” on my head yet. It’s like I have to re-learn everything each time. […]

Just to clarify: I wasn’t talking specifically about TXP here, nor about re-learning everything each time in TXP.
I was talking about my experience with general programming (Python, PHP, JS/jQuery).

Understood you perfectly well :)

Destry · 2008-06-29 09:41:14

This is the one post I get, and all I need to know right now. :)

But I dooooooooo like all this tag parsing stuff and look forward to discovering new ways to simplify and empower at the same time.

Thank you, devs, for the innovation fix (as in drug injection).

redbot · 2008-06-29 11:46:53

I’m very happy with the new, incoming features (I’m also happy to see that I’m not the only one to have problems understanding some of them) and obviously I think the txp developers deserve my eternal gratitude.

Nonetheless – and for what is worth – I’d like to express some minor concerns:

1) If it was for me – especially with regards to future novice users – I would in some way differentiate between “basic” tags and “advanced” tags in the documentation.
In fact IMHO one of Textpattern main strength has always been the use of xml-style tags, so resulting immediatly familiar for html “coders” and designers. But the introduction of the new “txp:variable” tag, for example, though mantaining his “XML tag” form will probably result more familiar to programmers rather than designers and I fear that it can turn away new potential users. The same is perhaps true for the “tags as attribute” feature (wich I understand and appreciate very much)

2) Back to the original topic, and again with an eye to novice users and ease of use, I don’t understand why a “<txp:if_data>” tag can’t be added.
Sure it seems that the same result will be achieved with <txp:variable> but I think in some cases having two tags with partially “overlapping” functionality is ok. Isn’t it true, for example, that with the new tag parser <txp:related_articles /> could completely be replaced with <txp:article_custom />?

That’s all, please notice I’m not – in any manner – criticizing the developers nor I wan’t to sound destructive.
On the contrary, these are only minor – and probably useless – considerations which won’t stop me to thank the devs again and again.

Last edited by redbot (2008-07-02 11:02:41)

maniqui · 2008-08-16 23:17:48

^^

@redbot: both very valid concerns, both well explained.

The most important features on TXP 4.0.7 (new tag parser, tags in tags and txp:variable/txp:if_variable tags) open a new world of possibilities and abilities, but the may make TXP learning curve a little more stepped.
And being that TXP is also aimed at web-designers/web-developers who sometimes doesn’t have any programming experience, I agree that it could turn away new potential users and also think their should be tagged as “Advanced Tags” (or something more funny like “Super advanced magic tricks using basic and advanced txp tags”).

Basic txp:tags (those used for basic tasks) have demonstrated to be enough for both doing both basic/complex sites.
I know we will eventually find ways to use the new 4.0.7 features (“advanced”) for achieving basic/complex tasks , but I think there aren’t too many useful examples of real-world usefulness yet.

Of course it’s also a selling point: it shows how many advanced/complex (hopefully, also useful) things can be done with TXP.
But at the same it may scare those who see just “complexity”. And certainly, an “XML”-style tag inside another “XML”-style tag as attribute looks like complexity, IMHO. Also, the word “variable” can also scare a few ones…

Regarding your second concern, I agree with you. Even if we can emulate a txp:if_data using just txp:variable and txp:if_variable (as wet explained), it will be a nice tag (txp:if_data) to have.
But then, there is a plugin (chh_if_data) which already does the job. It could be then made it to the core and improve it (if there is any room for improvement). Also, chh_* plug-ins seems to be abandoned, so it will be nice to make it to the core.

Now, let’s point to a feature that will make things easier and tidy: txp:article/txp:article_custom (and a few others) as container tags. That will make things easier to understand and to do, both for novices users and expert users.

So, in TXP 4.0.7, we will have both new simplicity and complexity: basic/easier and advanced/harder new ways of doing same/new things at the same time: that’s balance!.

Thanks again to devs for all the

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#25 2008-06-28 11:39:29

Re: an attribute named "empty"

#26 2008-06-28 12:12:35

Re: an attribute named "empty"

#27 2008-06-28 12:35:38

Re: an attribute named "empty"

#28 2008-06-28 12:50:01

Re: an attribute named "empty"

#29 2008-06-28 13:16:05

Re: an attribute named "empty"

#30 2008-06-28 14:08:59

Re: an attribute named "empty"

#31 2008-06-28 14:14:15

Re: an attribute named "empty"

#32 2008-06-28 15:51:42

Re: an attribute named "empty"

#33 2008-06-28 16:14:05

Re: an attribute named "empty"

#34 2008-06-29 09:41:14

Re: an attribute named "empty"

#35 2008-06-29 11:46:53

Re: an attribute named "empty"

#36 2008-08-16 23:17:48

Re: an attribute named "empty"

Board footer