Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

philwareham · 2016-09-02 13:03:30

I’ve put the switch list multi-edit checkboxes on left now. Will investigate the save button and duplicate/create links positioning later.

hcgtv · 2016-09-02 13:19:20

Bloke wrote #300937:

Tipping the balance towards 100% perfection in favor of one group of users — even if it’s noble and just — is going to negatively impact other groups. My goal is to allow the remaining 20% in each camp enough customisation through plugins and hooks to tweak the workflow higher than the out-of-the-box 80% to suit.

Stef, as always, thanks for your post, thanks for taking the time.

My question is, why can’t we have the best of all worlds?

Desktop, Mobile, Screen Reader and Color Blind modes.

Why can’t the admin adjust accordingly, like most websites do on mobile, or be programmable via preferences?

philwareham · 2016-09-02 13:22:55

hcgtv wrote #300957:

Stef, as always, thanks for your post, thanks for taking the time.

My question is, why can’t we have the best of all worlds?

Desktop, Mobile, Screen Reader and Color Blind modes.

Why can’t the admin adjust accordingly, like most websites do on mobile, or be programmable via preferences?

Sure, create a pull request of the code and I’ll look over it.

Bloke · 2016-09-02 13:34:47

phiw13 wrote #300953:

The problem only seems to happen when “Search All” is checked

Okay, got it. Thank you. It’s the Posted and Modified columns. Comparing non-latin chars against those fields returns the ‘illegal mix of collations’ error. Question is, what to do about it.

Can’t alter the collation of those columns (as far as I know) because they’re of datetime type, which doesn’t have a collation. But joining them in the query together with character-based columns that do have a collation results in the error.

Not sure if it’s possible to force the collation in the query. Not had any luck so far. Even if we could, it has a performance impact which is a problem on sites with a large article count.

I might be able to implement an as-yet unimplemented feature ‘case sensitive’. I was intending to use it to do binary comparisons but left it out for now. As it happens, using BINARY in front of the Posted and LastMod columns allows the query to pass so if I add that feature and retrofit the Articles panel with that option for those two columns, it should work:

SELECT COUNT(*) FROM textpattern textpattern
        LEFT JOIN txp_category category1 ON category1.name = textpattern.Category1 AND category1.type = 'article'
        LEFT JOIN txp_category category2 ON category2.name = textpattern.Category2 AND category2.type = 'article'
        LEFT JOIN txp_section section ON section.name = textpattern.Section
        LEFT JOIN txp_users user ON user.name = textpattern.AuthorID
        WHERE textpattern.ID in ('льби')
        or textpattern.Title like '%льби%'
        or textpattern.Body like '%льби%'
        or textpattern.Excerpt like '%льби%'
        or textpattern.Section like '%льби%'
        or section.title like '%льби%'
        or find_in_set('льби', textpattern.Keywords )
        or textpattern.Category1 like '%льби%'
        or textpattern.Category2 like '%льби%'
        or category1.title like '%льби%'
        or category2.title like '%льби%'
        or convert(textpattern.Status, char) = 'льби'
        or textpattern.AuthorID like '%льби%'
        or user.RealName like '%льби%'
        or textpattern.Image in ('льби')
        or BINARY textpattern.Posted like '%льби%'
        or BINARY textpattern.LastMod like '%льби%';

Watch this space.

Bloke · 2016-09-02 13:57:58

Okay, anyone affected by the non-latin search bug, I think this is now fixed. Please test and report back. Thank you for the invaluable reports and feedback so far.

Bloke · 2016-09-02 14:13:17

hcgtv wrote #300957:

why can’t we have the best of all worlds?

We can… ish. A plethora of preferences to set things this way and that is one approach, but we tend to opt for convention over configuration. It’s landed us in hot water over the years (cf. the Forms panel and those blessed “fixed” Forms) but in general it serves us well by cutting down the number of prefs. The UI tries to remember what you’ve set wherever possible so you toggle something and it’s like that next time. “Soft prefs”.

Myriad “hard preferences” to tweak this and that is not the way I’d like to see the interface go, as it’d still be constrained by what we believe is the best workflow. The best workflow is actually down to the user. Hence I’d rather invest the time and energy into opening up the interface to allow a bot_wtc-style plugin to appear that can take advantage of the many hooks to customise the interface.

Longer term, drag ‘n drop reorderable blocks. So if you, for example, don’t like the Save button where it is on one panel, drag it somewhere else. It’ll remember that position for you and you alone. It’s your workflow, after all. No endless prefs, no fuss.

There’ll probably be constraints where you can drag and drop stuff, and what you can move, but on the whole I’d like to see that. At the moment we’re just trying to implement the most optimised solution for all concerned (which is going to involve compromise for now) without introducing too many prefs we’d later have to remove when the interface becomes draggable.

hcgtv · 2016-09-02 14:29:52

philwareham wrote #300958:

Sure, create a pull request of the code and I’ll look over it.

So you’re telling me there’s a chance!

Bloke wrote #300961:

Longer term, drag ‘n drop reorderable blocks. So if you, for example, don’t like the Save button where it is on one panel, drag it somewhere else. It’ll remember that position for you and you alone. It’s your workflow, after all. No endless prefs, no fuss.

Drag ‘n Drop, yes I’ve heard this mentioned before. But wouldn’t time constraints push such a feature far out, years out?

Bloke · 2016-09-02 14:34:12

hcgtv wrote #300962:

Drag ‘n Drop… wouldn’t time constraints push such a feature far out, years out?

Depends on how many code contributions we get :-) I could dig the roadmap out, but illness, availability and more bugs than we’d envisaged have made that embarrassingly out-of-date.

We do still intend to increase the frequency of releases from now on, so there’s a chance it won’t be years!

hcgtv · 2016-09-02 15:05:23

Bloke wrote #300963:

Depends on how many code contributions we get :-)

Not to beat a dead horse, but if the project looks like it’s not moving forward, the front page hasn’t been updated in quite a long time, how are you going to attract coders?

There’s more to a project than code, the appearance of progress attracts new blood more so than a new txp:tag.

Let me give you an example, 4.6.0 beta 3 is out, where is that mentioned on the front page?

Bloke · 2016-09-02 15:11:40

hcgtv wrote #300964:

where is that mentioned on the front page?

textpattern.com/weblog/390/textpattern-cms-460-beta-3-released

Not on the front page, but then the blog articles don’t land there… yet. Presumably when the refresh hits the streets, they’ll do so.

The new site repo is available and was updated just a few hours ago. By all means get involved.

mrdale · 2016-09-02 15:57:39

The actions links look really scattered and cluttered. I’d love to see those links presented:

as just icons and use titles/tootips for the descriptions,
consolidated into one tool area, on one line (jquery-ui-control-group)
the expand collapse all consolidated into one button.

I believe that is in line with a lot of other interfaces for apps on the web i have used.

philwareham · 2016-09-02 16:01:57

mrdale wrote #300966:

The actions links look really scattered and cluttered. I’d love to see those links presented:

as just icons and use titles/tootips for the descriptions,

consolidated into one tool area, on one line

the expand collapse all consolidated into one button.

I believe that is in line with a lot of other interfaces for apps on the web i have used.

The UI for 4.6 is pretty much final (apart from the debate over where save buttons would be best placed). So any further changes will have to be done in the 4.7 cycle. I’ll keep your suggestions in mind during that process.

mrdale · 2016-09-02 16:08:03

So another 3 years for a couple of class assignments. Mkay. I’ll take solace in the fact that at least we’ve supported people using screen readers and dyslexia mitigation plugins. ;)

Hackedy hack with jquery…

philwareham · 2016-09-02 16:20:20

Well no, the next release will be much quicker hopefully. And it’s not just a couple of class assignments (for example: how exactly do you propose a single button that toggles expand all and collapse all? If you have half your widgets expanded, which do you want it to do, expand or collapse?).

Whilst I could constantly do all the suggestions by all the users for all their personal preferences, I think getting 4.6 released now is the priority – and we can agree that the UI is better than it was at 4.4 and 4.5, and will be better again at 4.7.

GugUser · 2016-09-02 16:27:33

philwareham wrote #300970:

(…) and we can agree that the UI is better than it was at 4.4 and 4.5, and will be better again at 4.7.

It’s significantly better. Thanks.

Textpattern CMS support forum

#31 2016-09-02 13:03:30

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

#32 2016-09-02 13:19:20

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

Bloke wrote #300937:

#33 2016-09-02 13:22:55

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

hcgtv wrote #300957:

#34 2016-09-02 13:34:47

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

phiw13 wrote #300953:

#35 2016-09-02 13:57:58

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

#36 2016-09-02 14:13:17

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

hcgtv wrote #300957:

#37 2016-09-02 14:29:52

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

philwareham wrote #300958:

Bloke wrote #300961:

#38 2016-09-02 14:34:12

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

hcgtv wrote #300962:

#39 2016-09-02 15:05:23

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

Bloke wrote #300963:

#40 2016-09-02 15:11:40

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

hcgtv wrote #300964:

#41 2016-09-02 15:57:39

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

#42 2016-09-02 16:01:57

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

mrdale wrote #300966:

#43 2016-09-02 16:08:03

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

#44 2016-09-02 16:20:20

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

#45 2016-09-02 16:27:33

Re: Feedback to: Textpattern CMS 4.6.0 beta 3 released

philwareham wrote #300970:

Board footer