Thread

John, you are correct that if you use the {lang:weblog} (or in 2.0 the {lang:channel}) variable in your Advanced Search form, that term will be exposed to the visitor.  However, like anything else in your templates, it’s entirely under your control whether to use that, or something that is a better fit for that search form.  You can always instead use “Bands”, “Venues”, “Ingredients”, “Counties”, or whatever term is actually descriptive of how you have structured your channels, and for what purpose.

Many thanks Derek.
I’m comfortable with channels 😊

Hopefully I’m not overseeing this was replied to already in the discussion, but in terms of implementing templates for EE, I read that there is an “example” site to learn from and no default themes, correct? (I understand EE is entirely too flexible to just be a “blog” with default templates like that other CMS) But if a company should want to cater to those who want a simple theme to install on EE, would said company still utilize the PHP template installation that is currently used? Or would everything be changing to a more folder-template format? I’d like to offer a few templates but have been holding back to see the best method to deploy them on 2.0

If that makes sense.

Er.

Hopefully I’m not overseeing this was replied to already in the discussion, but in terms of implementing templates for EE, I read that there is an “example” site to learn from and no default themes, correct? (I understand EE is entirely too flexible to just be a “blog” with default templates like that other CMS) But if a company should want to cater to those who want a simple theme to install on EE, would said company still utilize the PHP template installation that is currently used? Or would everything be changing to a more folder-template format? I’d like to offer a few templates but have been holding back to see the best method to deploy them on 2.0

If that makes sense.

Er.

EE will come with a default theme based on the Example site that can be optionally installed. We have some ideas on encouraging community contributed designs but we’re not quite ready to talk about that yet. However, we are comfortable saying that the way themes are installed during the installation process will be changed in 2.0 and the 1.x method will not work.

We’d like to see companies like EE Templates and the forth coming Tastee succeed and provide tools to help with that. This is something that we’ll be able to discuss more during the Developer Preview or beta phase of 2.0.

Have you seen the Sneak Preview movie?

Yes, I have. and like I said it’s pretty. And yes it is also much cleaner and clearer than the present UI. Great improvement.
But the buttery drag and drop GUI of WP 2.7 is both highly usable and easily configurable.

Cross-platform Javascript libraries have come a long way. A number of web 2.0 sites have upped the ante in terms application like usability. The paradigm is shifting and along with it our expectations.  I’m not simply looking for eye-candy, the ultimate goal for any changes of this type should be _productivity_.  I know you’ve all given this some thought, and us fans are all eagerly awaiting v2.0 to see what you come up with ...

Yes, WP2.7 looks sexy, let’s just hope that that system is robust enough as well.
Anyhow, accessories for your customers (info, tips and explanations)  are probably more
important than drag and drop panes. Because your setup of the admin-area and (same as
channels versus “arbitrary name”) you have to support your customer as well. Imagine
support with a complete mashed-up pane configuration. (Derek, can we lock accessories?)
Second, with CI on the back-end (and after-burner) expect crazy cool plugins for EE.
my 0.02 cents: we gonna need a (categorized) popularity AND quality rating system for 2.0 plugins…

I’m not simply looking for eye-candy, the ultimate goal for any changes of this type should be _productivity_.

All of our “eye-candy” enchancements are for the sake of productivity and customization.  We know our base, and we aren’t using a technology just because we can, so you’re safe there.

So far Everyone I introduce to EE usually has that “why have I never used this before?” reaction.

I like ‘channel’, I like ‘section’, I like ‘content’ also but I agree with it becoming fixed as channel.

Can we have member posting/editing restrictions by category as well as er… channel?  Please, pretty please…  😊

Hi all.

Great preview for the Version 2.0

I wish to ask about the Gallery module. Is there any? If the answer is yes, what are the improvements on it?

Thank you for reading….

Awesome news you guys. I’m actually a CI developer and I can’t wait to get my hands on EE2.0 to start toying around with it. I can’t imagine the things I will learn by just glimpsing over the EE2.0 code. Converting everything over to incorporate the MVC pattern takes a huge amount of work and I would like to thank the staff for taking their time to do so.

As a developer, even I was confused with the term “weblog”, because I thought it was supposed to be a full-blown CMS. As I found my way through the control panel I quickly realized, this was the really the case, a full-blown CMS, just an improper term being used. Whenever I wanted to set something up, I had to think in blog terms. Because, being able to change the term, it would still not allow me to change the term being used in the tags. So I had it renamed to section but I still had to use weblog=“name”... Now that was annoying.

I’m starting to like “channel” more and more as it becomes more fixed in my mind, it’s original and sounds professional. The thing that will determine it’s success and the question we must ask ourselves; how well can an EE developer explain this term to his clients? For all I care I can live with the term even if it was named “ganoobleziboola” but we are meant to be representatives of the CMS we are using as we have to get clients to “buy” into the CMS.

Now if you explain the term Channel to a client - depending on his or her expertises - I have no doubt the user will be somewhat confused, I also have no doubt the user will be confused by a lot of other technical terms. It’s up to us to refine this and properly explain the meaning of each function. I’ve noticed that a lot of my clients are very visual oriented people so the look and feel of the control panel is most often the determining factor: how fast can they find their way through the panel in order to write/edit articles/content.

If “channel” is supposed to represent and contain a stream of data, I might as well do some brainstorming on this one, how about: “container”, “segment”, “division”, “branch”, “wrapper”, “department”.

Now that I think about it, I actually like “branch” the most, it’s so universal you can’t really go wrong with it. Just start a new branch, add categories to it, then add content to it, then assign templates to it. In other words, bring structure to the branch. Sounds pretty logical and just about right to me.

Still, it’s just a word…. Hope I helped.

what’s wrong with “datasource”? i know it’s not sexy and not as own-able in a marketing sense, but it is what it is.

I am new to EE, have learned much of what I know about html and css in the last month, and like to think of myself as tech savvy—just more of a big picture guy. I’ve never used another CMS or even any blog software. I wanted to try EE to make a new site that could have easy content updates and not limit future expansions.

All this sort of makes me the perfect test case, like finding someone who has never used a cell phone to test SMS software.

I really like EE, have been able to do just what I want to do with it, and got good advice on the forum. I was able to get past the weblog terminology issue because the documentation was good and I didn’t have experience with any other CMS. The ‘theme’ thing threw me for a temporary loop, especially when I saw themes installed on my site and looking fairly essential. (Again, the forum sorted this out for me. The documentation was poor for explaining themes.)

“Channel” is okay with me. “Content” and “Content Group” might work better for me, but no big deal. Moving themes into examples is a smart move.

So, it’s all good.

One question would be how the replacement of weblog with channel will be done in the templates? Will it only affect the tags themselves, or would it be a general search and replace that would grab any use of weblog and convert it to channel? I’ve got ‘weblog’ used in my short names, so that’d be a little awkward if that were to happen.

As for the name itself ... I find it confusing. I am one of those that tends to get hung up on a word and the associations that come with it, and I expect to find channel awkward to get used to. I have to say I rather like running with scissors “datasource”, or perhaps even better just “source”. That immediately puts the right image in my head. Channels send out data, and “feel” right in an RSS feed, but a Source is where you fetch stored data, and that “feels” right for how I think when setting up templates. It also seems to work better with the Entry terminology.

Of course, everyone’s heads being different, channel is probably creating just the right associations for others. 😉

what’s wrong with “datasource”? i know it’s not sexy and not as own-able in a marketing sense, but it is what it is.

Who would want to type exp:datasource:entries every time? Anyway, I think the devs really made up their collective mind here, so we better get used to it 😊

One question would be how the replacement of weblog with channel will be done in the templates? Will it only affect the tags themselves, or would it be a general search and replace that would grab any use of weblog and convert it to channel? I’ve got ‘weblog’ used in my short names, so that’d be a little awkward if that were to happen.

Only exp:weblog, weblog=, {assign_variable:my_weblog=, and {my_weblog} patterns will be affected.  This of course is subject to change during the dev preview and beta periods.