Idea's for WB3

[Argos]

Does this Smarty stuff mean that we can no longer use normal templates? That is one of the great things about this cms as it is now: create youw own design like any normal static site, throw some tags in and off you go. The use of Smarty or any other complex templating system will kill this key feature, and make WB far less usable.

[Ryan]

Argos, Smarty will only make WB better and easier to use.
PHP templates should still be supported, but existing templates might need a bit of modifying for some of the function calls.

[dominic]

I have one idea/request - keep the templating as easy as it currently is.  Most other open source systems are not even 10% as easy as WB, and it is why I use it....customized site design is important, and it is almost like I can plug WB into ANY design.

Other CMS dont even come close to that kind of easy integration.

Dominic

[tomhung]

I have one idea/request - keep the templating as easy as it currently is.  [snip]

I agree with dominic.  I can unscrew the radiator cap of a site and roll in a new engine (WB), metaphorically speaking of course.....

[jesper.allermand]

Hi,

Not sure if this is on the list - think not:

- lock pages when a user opens it for editing, and unlock at save

I just had a quite unfortunate case where two editors wrote on the same article severel times. They were not so happy..

Best regards
- Jesper

[snakelab]

Templating:
I think it is a good decision to switch to smarty. Huge possibilities and no commitments. You CAN use the possibilities but you dont have to.

WB Core:
The most important thing is, that the WB Core is cut as much as it is possible from the rest (modules, themes etc.)

Just my 5cents.

Hartmut

[icouto]

Hi, all. Just read a few of the posts in this thread, and found out that Smarty is going to be introduced in version 3. I must admit, I'm quite disappointed. This is just one more thing for the developers to have to learn, with no real-world benefit, compared to the functionality the current templating system already provides. I know this is a moot point, as it has already been decided, but for all it's worth, here is my protest.

As far as wishlists for features, well, a good, built-in ADDRESS BOOK has been discussed elsewhere (http://forum.websitebaker.org/index.php/topic,2700.msg36251.html) and I think that this would make a fantastic addition to the core, and just as essential as 'login', 'search', or 'intro page'.

[DGEC]

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"

"Save and View this page"

[littlefish]

When I create a site with WB, I firstly create the page structure, then go back and fill in all content. Most of this content is prewritten, and so it's a data entry task.

It struck me that in the 'modify page' screen, next to the current page section, it would be useful to have 'next page' and 'previous page' links to enable faster data entry, rather than having to go back to the pages screen.

The only obvious danger that I can think of is people forgetting to press 'save' before changing to a different page.

Cheers,
Emma

[icouto]

HTMLArea should perhaps be replaced by Xinha.

[ruebenwurzel]

HTMLArea should perhaps be replaced by Xinha.

or better FCKEditor. 

Matthias

[Mesum]

I just hope that version 3 doesn't become yet another Joomla as in so much options in the backend, you wouldn't know where to start.
As of right now, I want only 3 things.
1: Caching system.
2: Use of AJAX in the backend, especially for Pages area. Current process of creating a simple page with WYSIWYG takes too many page reloads.
3: Smarty.

[lexscripta]

Hi, all. Just read a few of the posts in this thread, and found out that Smarty is going to be introduced in version 3. I must admit, I'm quite disappointed. This is just one more thing for the developers to have to learn, with no real-world benefit, compared to the functionality the current templating system already provides.

I personally understand how you feel. It is hard enough work as it is to develop web sites with penache', and it seems something new to learn might add to the already heavy burden.

I don't know if you are aware of this, but there is a mad rush of CMSes in  general moving to Smarty In fact, there are several commercial products doing the same thing. I use CMS Made Simple, and it uses the Smarty Template engine - It is, in the opinions of many, the only real competitor to WB.

The thing about smarty, is that it separates PHP data, and transaction processing from the content presentation. It does all of this through our regular knowledge of HTML - OR Css!!!

Did you guys hear me correctly?

I said you can do an entire front end template in HTML using Smarty if you wish. You do not HAVE to learn CSS, and yet still put together a beautiful web site. Of course, CSS is the best way to go, and smarty works beautifully in that environment

Can you imagine writing an index.php file yourself that presents all your data that has maybe 10 lines of code? Thats what Smarty can do for you. Of course you will have already made presentation layers - .tpl files - such as header.tpl, footer.tpl, etc. but again, all of this will mostly consist of what you already know. There are maybe 5-10 Smarty classes to learn that will allow you to do ALL of your presentation. This is simply amazing.

Don't fear this - In the end, you are going to be A much better designer, and a happier one - because for those of us that do not know how to code well in PHP, we will now become the heros in the eyes of the web surfer world and our clients!

Think of it this way - Smarty is for the the front end Developer - thats you and me. (Well the programmer benefits because he doesn't have to worry about presentation, just has to write classes/methods/ functions for the designer) But you will be able to easily build your tables or divs and call the function/method or whatever, and present it exactly the way you want - no kludge code - None Nada Zip!!!

I personally started studying Smarty now, because the writing is on the wall. It is going to be the premier templating language. Just try it - you have lots of time - spend 15 - 20 minutes a day learning it - and before you know it, WB III will be out, and you will already be ahead of the game...

Hats off to the developers for going this route - you are truly forward thinking... and will make our designing lives so much easier and productive - CHEERS!

LexScripta

[tomhung]

i dont know if this has already been suggested or not... i didnt want to read all 5 pages of comments.

I would like the ability to chose the WYSIWYG for an individual page / news module etc.  It can have a "use default" option. 

There are times when I want to post directly to HTML (no WYS..)  This is usually due to the WYSIWYG breaking my content. and i dont want to hack / config the editor for one instance. 

G

[marco_panino]

Hi,

It would be nice to have an "advanced use", that allows:
- one only person can have rights to a page (without creating one-person-group to assign a right)
- one page MUST be son of one page, but CAN be son of others too

IMHO can be wonderful:
- manage multi menus by database, not by info.php
- use ajax to store a modified page
- don't use smarty, please! Allow a developer to turn off this s**t!

I read that WSB3 will put all media in database.
Please, don't do it!

To improve security, you can store your media in a private folder, and retrieve it with a php parser:
(this is a pseudo-code!)

Code:

$contents = readfile("/httpdocs/missed.gif");
if($haveRights) {
  if(file_exists("/hiddenDir/media1.gif")) {
    $contents = readfile("/hiddenDir/media1.gif");
  }
}

You can store in DB a name hash (salted?), you store your file with a 32-chars name, so you can have a good security level without wieghting down your DB.

Filesystem:

Code:

/
+--> /hiddenDir
      +--> /hiddenDir/ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ012345
+--> /htdocs
      +--> /htdocs/parseMedia.php

Database:

Code:

Table media
| Name    | MD5                              | salt  |
+---------+----------------------------------+-------+
| foo.gif | 4964202c6b660851475fe3adc6e63ace | 12345 |
+---------+----------------------------------+-------+
(this is the real MD5 of 12345foo.gif)

Table rights
| User_ID | MD5                              | right |
+---------+----------------------------------+-------+
| 12      | 4964202c6b660851475fe3adc6e63ace | RW    |
+---------+----------------------------------+-------+

parseMedia.php checks rights (can you see...?), takes the filename (or file ID, better), reads in DB his MD5, reads the content and puts headers (content-type, file name) and bytes!

If you want, you can cipher also the content, but it seems paranoiac...

What do you think about?

[ton_cut345]

when is the launch date of website baker 3?? i can't wait...

[Waldschwein]

Hello!

when is the launch date of website baker 3?? i can't wait...

You know such posts aren't very pleasing. It's done when it's done. But that wouldn't be this year.

Regards Michael

[doc]

Hello,

the latest announcements regarding WB3.0 can be found on the WB3.0 project side.

Regards Christian

[DGEC]

1. how on earth do you find anything with Tracker? I hate it. According to the "recent changes" link, there hasn't been any updates since July, Christian.

2. "EasyBake" - Hasbro might take issue with use of their bare trademark. EasyBaker, websitebakerEasy, anything else slightly different would be a safer idea. Note that EzBaker is used several times already, including for a REAL pc easy oven! 

3. Absolutely use an abstraction layer to increase the portability. But why not use ADOdbLITE version - check out the statistics for the speed increase!   http://adodblite.sourceforge.net/benchmark.php Unless of course there's specific functions required. The site has a list of supported and unsupported functions, and modules that add on (some) specific functionality if required.

[orko3001]

Some kind of forum integration or database bridge. Could cookies sort out simultaneous login?

[gavjof]

• Better User (and group) management, like one user could be in two or more groups.

This is the one thing that I would love to see. While the current system is easy to use, this would give us so many more options when building a community-based site. This is why I love WB over Joomla - sure Joomla is powerful but WB has better Group Control.

Plus, instead of selecting members from a drop-down, why not enable a list also so you can sort by name/group/etc.

[lanesharon]

I just started with WB last week.  So far I have a multipage, multilink, website up and am still building it.  It will be hundreds of pages large, so I have a few suggestions for 3:
1. Would be nice if the aggregator, or some module like it, could be a hierarchy of directories, not just page names.  That way, a large site could be directory categorized.
2. Stop loading up the AddOns through zip files.  That forces the user to constantly reload entired addon systems instead of just modifying a page at a time. I don't know about anyone else, but I use CSS extensively.  I would like to tweak my css page only and reload just the css code to check things out.
3. Keep it sleek.  The current system is sweet because it is sleek and runs easily.  Keep the modules as addons so that users can pick and choose what they want instead of loading up a system that is bloated with addons.  You have a nice product.  I hope it stays that way!

[mickpage]

What happened to the rule laid down in post number 1 (i.e. only one post per person allowed)? It is very difficult to read this thread now.
My requests for WB3 are:
- continue to allow multiple WYSIWYG modules - they all have pros and cons. FCKEdiitor is great when working at home but impossible to use at work because of the "locked-down" functionality of our PCs.
- enable easy multi-site deployment - multiple sites using one code implementation.
Looking forward to this release.

**EDIT - after Ryan's post immediately below**
Shame that people ignored your warnings!

[Ryan]

What happened to the rule laid down in post number 1 (i.e. only one post per person allowed)? It is very difficult to read this thread now.

Unfortunately, after much effort in warning users and merging re-posts, I had to give up, and now that  this thread has run free, it wont be as useful when developing WB3.
At least the community has the chance to voice their ideas.

[DGEC]

May I suggest something like what Audacity has done for feature requests?

Set up a Feature Request page and allow people to add suggestions AND to have maybe 5 votes.  Votes are to allow the community to express desires and establish how much they want those features (i.e. prioritize).  Here's the link to the current wiki page http://audacityteam.org/wiki/index.php?title=Feature_Requests

There's nothing stopping someone from putting in suggestions (and explaining it in great detail). You don't have to vote for it as one of your top 5 priorities, but it might be someone else's top priority.

This method still does need to be pruned ocassionally, but there is built-in incentive to read the whole list, because anybody that doesn't read the previous entries for a feature will dilute his vote.  It also helps prioritize for the community as a whole, rather than just a collection of pure wish lists.

(I did try to keep my thoughts in one post, but then people say things that really need a response posted close to the original because if you go 8 pages away to respond, no-one will see your response...  )