Bob Sleys said the following on 06/20/2011 09:59 PM:

> Thanks for the reply but I do find a couple of points interesting.

> First you rail against using the tree structure of the pages to generate
> menus and then point out that copy/reording is needed.

Please re-read: that's not what I said.


> To the first point the entire tree structure doesn't feed into the menu.

Which is what I *DID* say.

>  It's easy to check for a page part and exclude that page and all it's
> children from the menu.  Or reverse that and only include pages that
> have the page part.  IE a filter in generating the menu. 

True, but the more processing you do the complicated things become and
the more code the more room for mistakes and the more you deal with
special cases and exceptions ...

Yes, ANYTHING is possible if you're willing to put enough effort into
coding it.

No, I'd rather KISS and rely on good structure and design.



> I don't
> control all the content on the sites I put up.  

I have a quite a number of client sites like that.
However I do have control over things like layouts, what extensions are
loaded and the STRUCTURE.  Users can add content: new articles,
comments, but the content fits in with the STRUCTURE.  They can't run it
topsy-turvy or restructure it.

> What's so great about
> radiant is I can do the backup stuff get it all running, setup the basic
> site design etc. and then turn it over to the customer to add content.

Yes.  That's what I'm saying.

> I need to make it as easy as possible for the customer to
> add/more/change pages.

But not restructure it. ...


> Back to the original pont of the post.  I'm asking if anyone knows of a
> reorder extension that works with 1.0 of Radiant.  All the ones I looked
> at including those posts here so far are quite old so AFAIK have a good
> chance of not working with 1.0.  I'm also sugesting that it would be a
> good addition to core of radiant.

Is there a particular reason you need to be at the bleeding edge?
Are there more features there that are of greater importance than a
working copy/move, because at 0.8.1 and 0.9.x I *KNOW FOR SURE* they
work.  And looking at them, I don't think its a big issue upgrading
them.  Its not as if you're adding some radically new functionality.

I'm not sure I agree about adding to the core.
Some of the sites I've developed while not actually static in content
have no need for reordering once they are set up.  Some of the blogs and
BBoards are like that.  Always new content, but it is added - the basic
structure, layout, facilities etc, doesn't need to change.


Reply via email to