Idea's for WB3

[zaggi]

I would really like more options in the "Form" making.

1. Width-setting on the form for each field. (So the whole form can be the same width)
2. CSS options for the fields. (Or some kinda like that)
3. More settings for Checbox group. So you could make em as a list insted of a "line" - how do I explain that? 

Thats all for now

[Lútsen]

WB3 should run in safe mode.

I use WebsiteBaker quite a lot but lately I am finding out that more and more hosts are allowing PHP to run only in safe mode. This is a big problem for me because currently WB needs to have safe mode turned off. And I am told by some people that within the next year probably 90% of all PHP hosts will only allow PHP to run with safe mode on for security reasons. So my idea for WB3 is to make it work with safe mode turned ON.

[Ryan]

Lútsen,

As far as I know so far, I believe PHP5 has no "safe mode", so I don't understand why the hosts would not upgrade to that.
Regardless, WB3 will run on safe mode. 

NOTE TO ALL: Please read up on the forums and WB3 project page before posting.

 

[DGEC]

PHP5 may not require a safe mode, but not everybody WANTS to rewrite their system and upgrade from PHP4. So hosts will still offer 4 for awhile, I'm sure.

I will probably have mutliple sites and utilties running that may not be upgraded to PHP5 so I would still want PHP4, with safe mode.

[hotrod]

Hi all!

Maybe it has been posted before, but a forum search didn't turn up any useful results. So here's my contribution to the "wish-list":

A preview-funktion, similar to the preview button in this forum.

I would like to be able to preview and evaluate modifications to my site, ranging from minor changes like corrected typos to entire redesigns, before I make them accessible to the public.
In other words, be able to build V1.2 in the background, while V1.1 is still up and running and then swap to V1.2 with the click of a button.
Would that be feasible?

greetings,
Gerhard

[theAlien01]

* Get rid of the /pages folder, just keep everying thing in the root.

This is a very good idea in terms of SEO-friendlyness. (The closer a word is to www.mysite.nl/, the higher Google will value it. At this moment, in most WB-sites the words 'wb' and 'pages' are highly valued by Google, something you might want if your site is about books, but not if it is about cars)

* Another SEO-idea: Give every page a custom URL/link instead of an URL derived from the menu-title (an option which is also in a Drupal-addon)

Example:
Page-title: Page number ONE
Menu-title: page 1
Link: /p1.php

* And jet another SEO-idea (Google appreciates links ànd headings): Linking headings! Give an option to automatically change every

Code:

<H1>text</H1>

into

Code:

<H1><A href=current_page#current_h1 class=H1 title=menu-title>text</A></H1>

[afbelow]

Do you think, that there is a way to create in wb3 a integration for function inclusion into page modules, as this exists for snippet modules? As we need e.g. for the Google-Map module.

AFBelow

[mathetos]

A preview-funktion, similar to the preview button in this forum.

I would like to be able to preview and evaluate modifications to my site, ranging from minor changes like corrected typos to entire redesigns, before I make them accessible to the public.

I agree, though I hadn't thought of it being so extensive as that. hotrod, it seems like you just want to run two wb sites on the same server, which has both been suggested many times and is also promised on the Project Board. So, that's good news!

But when I think preview mode I was thinking of what WordPress does. There's a BIG difference between what a client sees in the WYSIWYG editor and what the end result is on the page. WordPress integrates an iframe preview of the live page under the WYSIWYG editor. I thought that would be really helpful.

Secondly, I worked as an admin for a private school offering online classes through Moodle (as an online class platform, it's hands down the best). Because of the high rate of content swapping with new classes, teachers, students, etc. Moodle developed a "backup and restore" feature that was VERY handy. It basically takes the entire contents of your class (or classes) and creates a downloadable .zip file with them. I don't know the mechanics of it, but magically(!) this .zip could also be used to restore a class --in full--  if it were ever deleted. One could also move the entire class to a new category of the whole system by restoring the .zip in the new category. What amazed me the most was how fast the .zip/unzip process was considering how many thousands of files there were. (Of course, the whole process happened remotely, the files never leaving the server until you downloaded the .zip)

All that to say, this would also be a great way to transport WB installations to new servers, to keep regular backups, to start with a more developed installation instead of the default, etc., etc. This would also be necessary for those who have permission to their database (meaning the user name/passwords, but not to PHPMyAdmin), but not administrative access (I know that's a weird scenario, but trust me, it happens-- maybe just to me!). With all the upcoming changes to the FileStructure and the database, this type of backup/restore might become much easier to implement than currently. That would really be highest on my wish list.

~mathetos~

[lorenzo]

kiss - keep it small & simple.

wb3 should not move closer to typo3.
some people want to have this and that added to wb just because they need it.

the cms  should stay as small and simple as possible. opening the architecture to allow for advanced modules is a good move. the image gallery should not be a feature of the cms.
don't create another nuke.

however there are good things that canbe added which don't affect the usability nor the complexity. look at the typo3 caching mechanism and implement a simpler solution

other things could be changed that would imho ease the use of wb.
if the page tree would act like the one from typo3 users would not have to click through the tree as often as they have to do now.

bottom line:
- provide an open architecture and keep as much functionality in the plugins (modules).
- ease the usability in the backend
- stay away from features like workflows

just my 2 cents

[SaBRENT]

I had a few other things I was thinking about but dont have them on mind atm. One is that the menu systems in admin use ajax as it is much faster to move pages in order and manage items.

I'll edit when I can, I still place this system over any other CMS - easy, user friendly, clean code.

[doc]

The things, which annoy me at WB2 are the following:

• CSS styles of modules are placed in the <body> and create invalid XHTML
• prefer to have style definitions in files not in DB to allow easy update of modules
• no intelligent update mechanism of modules available

But, all the points mentioned above are tackled and will be resolved with WB3.

The things I really like in WB from an admin point of view; easy to install, update and customize.
Never installed a CMS before which was easier to hand over to the people filling it with content. For me the one reason for WB.

A bit anguish that the coming WB3 will be a Moloch like Type3 or Joomla due to the long wish list.

So please, keep it simple!! 
Regards Christian

[marcel]

Hi Christian, I agree with you. Ease of use is a very good point of WB.
But, also we have a hierarchical structure of pages and I easy template customization
that make much better than joomla, because we dont have a separation beetween the content and the topics to access them. In the typo3, we have a hierarchical structure, but It is difficult to install and the template it isnt easy.

But, we cant break the development motived by our necessities. We can have a diferent tool for each case. I think can be done a branch of WB, WB Full and WB lite for example.

Other manner to makes easy is working on interface, keeping advanced configurations
in new panels.

Thanks,
Marcel

[doc]

Hi Marcel,

thanks for your reply. I am anyway looking forward for the WB3 launch and still hope it´s still as customer friendly than the current 2.6.4 branch.

Regards Christian

[ClearSky]

I am wondering are we able to have a new input box to specify the page name. This may help a lot for a site in Asian language.

[YeShakka]

OK, here I take the chance to post my ideas after running a productive WB site for about a year.

First of all, like all others I wonna stress the WB killer feature simplicity which should remain! I think the developers are aware of it.

Here some detailed ideas:

* Admin-Temples to enhace the user interface
Users should be able to create and install admin templates hwich won't be overwritten during a update. With these we could easily customize a WB for a client or improve the administration (e.g. create a new like directly to admin-modules from the backend start page...)
=> simple JavaScript or AJAX like hover-, grey-, light-, box, accesskeys in the backend and frontend templates.

* CVS or thing alike to clean up the code mess in the forum
cvs for addons as well -> joint development make a community strong!
users should be able to submit their changes and fixes in a transparent way

* module standards which a module that enters the addon repository should fullfill
    - provide common code / snippets to integrate or adapte the module to WB
    - decide for one W3C-doctype (e.g. xhtml tansitional) and then force all modules to comply this one (tables with summary, br closed)
    - check for reusability of the code: short-tags off
These module standards would also help WB even with modules installed to complay W3C and accessability standards (in Germany all institutional web sites must complay certain accessability rules by law!)

* Update / create a well documented hello-world module
This would also enshure that new modules meet the coding standards of the project and can be easily created by people new to WB

* installation
During installation it should be asked for the charset coding of the database. Thus a user doesn't forget to set it in options. E.g. sometimes the mysql-db runs in charset ISO 8859-1 and the WB default value when installing is UTF-8 => this can create problems with special caracters.

* module stylesheets
a possibility to include css in the header in order not to break the validation. At the moment modules define css inline or load in the body a extra css file which doesn't validate.
so a idea could be to load all module css with an external style sheet:
<link rel="stylesheet" href="<templatedir>/css/modules.css" type="text/css" media="screen, projection" />
Then we would need a routine that lets the modules enter their css into that file.
Or, the css for the modules is stored in the database and then delivered inline. example: <div style="thestyle:value">  . But in both cases we would need to enshure that new versions don't break the layout of the previously installed version of the module.

* readyness for new web features
For instance Wordpress can also deliver static pages (http://codex.wordpress.org/Pages). We have to ask: Why shoul a user install WB instead of WP? WP has a larger user and developer base and therefore more plugins etc. (A bit provocative, but we wanna stay competive, right?)
Many CMS (e.g. drupal) and blog systems use RSS for every site. Why could we have this in WB? Also the RSS-creation in WB2 is not very satisfying.
The big thing in the web is interconnectivity, user interaction and multi media. What about a tagging, podcasting, social bookmarking? Do we need functions in WB-core on which we can hook the modules which will provide this features?

So a good question would be:
Do we just want bring our CMS which is delivering more or less static content (or better content that doesn't change often) or do we also wanto to go for all the nice new features which a being discussed under the term Web2.0?
Note: I am not talking about AJAX etc. All I am thinking is - my last question -
How can we improve the users' experiece and the ease of use.

Furthermore, I would like to thank all developers for the good work done so far and hope that you have the strenght to continue the way ahead. 

[haarrrgh]

Only two ideas so far:

1. Make it possible to assign each user to as many groups as you like
For example:
I want User 1 to edit Page 1.
I want User 2 to edit Page 1 and Page 2.
(The only way I can set the permissions like this in WB2 is to make a group for each user)


2. In the "Pages" section in the admin panel, PLEASE make all sub-menus visible by default
Period. 

[DGEC]

If W3 is definitely template-driven with Smarty, then maybe TemplateLite would be a possible substitute - it's meant to be a smaller, faster drop-in replacement for Smarty.

http://templatelite.sourceforge.net/

One (new) feature of TL that would be especially good for a CMS is that apparently with Smarty you should delete all compiled template files in the directory when you change a template. TL checks the version/date and automatically recompiles modified templates.

Disclaimer: I know virtually nothing about either of these library, I just saw an update notice. I'm not really thrilled with templates as such, one more thing I need to learn.

[Phill Kenoyer]

My customers would like to have the ability to make a change to a page, see it as a draft, when they are satisfied publish it.

I'm guessing that to do this you would need two copies of the page being modified.  One is the live version, the other is the draft version.  When the user is finished making changes, the publish button would copy the draft to the live site.

Thanks!

[binkie]

I would like the possibility for the admin to add self-defined fields to the user's data.
Text fields, check boxes, radios buttons.

These can be used in the code pages.

Binkie.

[sigi]

in 2.x group rights go for modules. i would prefer to set rights for single pages. also the navigation should not show links for pages the current user has no right to visit ...

[gingebaker]

Well one small thing i didn´t recognize in the postings before.

If you edit an WYSIWYG page:
Add a button "Save and close" wich will bring you back to the pages overview. So you don´t come back to the WYSIWYG Editor-page automatically.

So you would have:
"Save and edit again" | "Save and close" | "cancel"

my other personal favourites
- Admin Templates
- a documentation of the module interfaces
- modul css styles not in body tags

however, keep it simple
wb rules!!

[wimbo]

Hi,

I love WB. So whatever you do, keep it simple and easy to use.

Things that i would like to see changed:

• Changing admin template
• Changing e-mails to (new) members
• Custom member fields
• Stats
• Disable users to backend (admin)
• Members into multiple groups
• Mailings to members or membergroup
• Multilanguage, the same site in 4 or 5 languages...
• Using code in WYSIWYG
• Quickly sort pages (combobox instead of arrows)
• Hide/Show pages per membergroup
• Change permissions after installing modules/templates/etc (chomd /chown)
• Archive for newsitems (although this is a module)
• Show/Hide page at certain date/time
• Menu-link is very unstable (moving is always risky)
• Showing menu_link in admin/pages instead of page_title
• Editing images with uploading (resizing, cropping etc...)
• Option to creat thumbnail when uploading

Most of the thing i changed myself, but it would be easy if this was intergrated in WB3.

Thanx!

[Waldschwein]

@Wimbo:

• Changing admin template

Well, I don't know any CMS/forum software with backend where you could easily change the admin template. BUT: Of course you could write a new template for it easily! Like now in 2.X

• Changing e-mails to (new) members

Eh, what do you mean here?

• Disable users to backend (admin)

You can do that right now in 2.6. you even can "turn off" a user.

• Multilanguage, the same site in 4 or 5 languages...

This is also possible with the current 2.6 WB.

• Using code in WYSIWYG

And also this. Use FCKEditor, there you can insert HTML without problem.

• Quickly sort pages (combobox instead of arrows)

There is an AJAX/Javascript module right now available for 2.6. Will be inserted I think in 2.7 code. There you could change the pages with your mouse.  

• Hide/Show pages per membergroup

Ehmmm... Have you ever seen the backend of WB 2.6?  Sorry, but this is also possible.
[/list]
Most of the thing i changed myself, but it would be easy if this was intergrated in WB3.
Thanx!

[Macros]

Hi,

only one comment:

Do not use Smarty ...

Cya

[Ryan]

Sorry to disappoint you Macros, but in case you haven't already read somewhere, Smarty will be used.
Reminder to all: please do not post multiple replies to this topic - instead edit you one and only post to show the latest of your requests.
In the coming months I will be sorting through the list from start to finish, so don't think old posts wont get re-read if edited.