The include dynament is the equivalent of a server side include in LiveServer. From memory you can only include content that is stored in the LiveServer repository though.
On 9 June 2010 20:22, bobbykjack <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the feedback, Gavin. Have you managed to use server-side > includes in conjunction with a page delivered via LiveServer? I was > under the impression that that was pretty tricky to do, although > that's not to say it's impossible! > > - Bobby > > On Jun 9, 11:05 am, Gavin Cope <[email protected]> wrote: > > I've used the include dynament before (not in your context) and it works > > just fine. > > > > I have also done what you're talking about by publishing out the > navigation > > structure to a single file and using server side includes (not using > > LiveServer), calling it into the site. This avoids the full site publish > > that you're referring to. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Gavin > > > > On 9 June 2010 20:02, bobbykjack <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > One issue we've always had with RedDot is that, due to the fact it > > > publishes static content, any changes to common elements (e.g. a > > > footer) require a full site publish which can take several hours. > > > However, I've recently discovered the potential of including content > > > via LiveServer (which we've only really used previously for the search > > > function) and this seems a much better approach. > > > > > In short, we have a new template that looks - more or less - like > > > this: > > > > > <rde-dm:include content="<%anc_include%>" /> > > > > > This allows us to link to common content within RedDot (that > > > placeholder would, otherwise, be a container) that is included via > > > LiveServer. When the common content is published out, all pages will > > > automatically include the latest version without requiring a full site > > > publish. Of course, the LS cache needs to be cleared, but that's far > > > more palatable. > > > > > There's also a fallback in our template for RedDot mode whereby the > > > common content is included via a container so SmartEdit / Preview > > > still work as expected. > > > > > Does anyone else use this approach? Are there any disadvantages with > > > it you've come across, or can think of? > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > - Bobby > > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > > "RedDot CMS Users" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > . > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > [email protected]<reddot-cms-users%[email protected]> > <reddot-cms-users%[email protected]<reddot-cms-users%[email protected]> > > > > > . > > > For more options, visit this group at > > >http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RedDot CMS Users" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<reddot-cms-users%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RedDot CMS Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/reddot-cms-users?hl=en.
