I see 'Custom Content Part' as an upcoming feature...
I am curious how you all might see this working?
Custom Content Part? How would you like that to be?
Custom Content Part? How would you like that to be?
======
DX
======
DX
======
It's the feature I'd like to see the most!
It can be useful for my clients.
Imagine you build, say, a web shop with product informations. A that time you have no way to edit a "product page" within one screen. You have to use an html content, or use several content parts (a list for the features, a text for a description, image contents for the pictures...).
With a custom content I guess you could build a "product page" content part with all the fields. Or basically a content part for each different kind of pages.
Easier editing for the end user!
You can argue it would be redondant with templates, but I don't think so. We could have less templates and focus on the content itself rather than on the container.
I wish there was also an easier way to customize the html output generated by the standard content parts (think w3c validation and accessibility).
It can be useful for my clients.
Imagine you build, say, a web shop with product informations. A that time you have no way to edit a "product page" within one screen. You have to use an html content, or use several content parts (a list for the features, a text for a description, image contents for the pictures...).
With a custom content I guess you could build a "product page" content part with all the fields. Or basically a content part for each different kind of pages.
Easier editing for the end user!
You can argue it would be redondant with templates, but I don't think so. We could have less templates and focus on the content itself rather than on the container.
I wish there was also an easier way to customize the html output generated by the standard content parts (think w3c validation and accessibility).
Yes, custom content part would be nice. I am guessing it would be considerably more challenging. I work in Flash and have managed to incorporate it within Wcms, since there are a number of rep tags and the like to pull from. I use {PAGETITLE} (unofficial), [TITLE],[SUB],[SUMMARY],[IMAGE],[MORE] {ARTICLELINK}... and SESSIONS to load these parameters into Flash.
Yet the real strength of Flash, namely its interactivity, is difficult to implement at this stage. Would be nice if guidleines to content part architecture were documented somewhere.
In principal the content part is about the creation of content and the ability to use Flash to create (and record) content would be great. Fulvio and Dr. Swank are working on a full blown Flash enabled version of Wcms, which is quite interesting (Fcms 0.4)
In principal, the ability to create content interactivly using flash would be a great addition to Wcms. I am guessing in would build on the already existing multimedia content part....but extending it into 'recording content' created in a backend 'FLASHED' interface into the DB....
Yet the real strength of Flash, namely its interactivity, is difficult to implement at this stage. Would be nice if guidleines to content part architecture were documented somewhere.
In principal the content part is about the creation of content and the ability to use Flash to create (and record) content would be great. Fulvio and Dr. Swank are working on a full blown Flash enabled version of Wcms, which is quite interesting (Fcms 0.4)
In principal, the ability to create content interactivly using flash would be a great addition to Wcms. I am guessing in would build on the already existing multimedia content part....but extending it into 'recording content' created in a backend 'FLASHED' interface into the DB....