Thanks again for the pointer, this time towards templates.
I appreciate your focus on CSS. Our Web Engineer has a beautiful, CSS
driven layout for us to implement in Radiant.
All the best,
> From: Anton Aylward <anton.aylw...@rogers.com>
> Organization: System Integrity
> Reply-To: <anton.aylw...@rogers.com>, Radiant Mailing List
> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:18:01 -0500
> To: Radiant Mailing List <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Subject: Re: [Radiant] Thoughts on layout design approach
> Peter Degen-Portnoy said the following on 01/13/2010 05:49 PM:
>> Hi Folks,
>> Thanks so very much to everyone who responded; this has been fantastically
>> It sure looks like we have a number of options including creating two more
>> layouts (although we would like to not have essentially the same layout 3
>> times; there is probably a, way to DRY up the layouts).
> As I mentioned. put things like 'sidebar' into the snippets than you
> have a pair of layouts: "sidebar-left" and "sidebar-right".
> Its not so much DRY as 'factoring out common elements' and making them
> into building blocks.
> Its easier on your users to have many Layouts to choose from, even
> though they are 'much the same', than to put them though the other
> contortions you discussed. If you name the Layouts 'logically', and by
> that I mean the name reflects the function on the site, things like:
> 'front-page', event-page .....
> Heck: I started that and I ended up using the templates plugin within
> just TWO layouts for one site, a 'front page' with no sidebar and a
> normal page with sidebar, and everything else done with Templates.
> Great plugin. It "directs' the users as to what to fill in where almost
> like creating pages with a form!
>> We could also use
>> the r:if_url and r:unless_url to control the display of elements. It would
>> more tightly bind the layout to the site structure, but the layout *is* the
>> site, so we're good on that. :-)
>> The r:if_content tags would allow us to use a simpler naming convention,
>> like "right_gutter" and all the elements that need to appear in the
>> right_gutter are placed there.
> Ah, I don't know about other people, but I've always taken the 'gutter'
> to mean the dead space between two elements, such as the main content
> and the sidebar. Be careful inventing terminology.
> As I pointed out, I have the Layouts with 'left-sidebar' and
> 'right-sidebar'. Why? Because the CSS is very specific about what goes
> A 'left-sidebar' page has a different offset of the main content from a
> layout that has a right sidebar or no sidebar.
> And unless you want it bouncing around all over the place, you DO need
> the CSS.
> #Mainpage #SidebarPage
> <body> <body>
> <div id="container"> <div id="container">
> <div id="content"> <div id="left-sidebar">
> <div> </div>
> <div id="content">
> </div> </div>
> </body> </body>
> Do it with CSS
> Let me make that quite clear.
> You can't just throw DIV-level elements around, you have to take care
> and consideration of the order they will rendered and the CSS.
> If its getting complicated, difficult or unclear you doing it wrong.
> I know that sounds a bit arrogant and fascist, but its true. One day
> someone will come along to read this, perhaps maintain it. It may be
> you years on, smarter perhaps or just perhaps a bit hurried. Keep it
> simple and clear. Your users and your colleagues will thank you.
> "A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS--But it uses up a thousand times
> the memory."
> Radiant mailing list
> Post: Radiant@radiantcms.org
> Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/
> Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
Radiant mailing list