irishetcher
Forum Replies Created
-
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Disable Gutenberg] Gutenberg filterThanks Jeff. Didn’t realise that you had updated that article.
Cheers
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Gutenberg] Gutenberg: Still missing the essentialsUpdated Gutenberg Review: Oct 2018
________________________________________________________________________________
CheckIng out the latest build of WP 5 and Gutenberg 4.1.1 and I have to say with a minimal configuration of plugins it does show some promise.
The good points first:
Using re-usable blocks as templates has some promise.
Likewise for custom post fields
Works best if you use it exclusively on its own and with a theme built for GutenbergAs usual though there are some caveats.
The first thing I noticed is that the only way to disable Gutenberg is with the Classic Editor plugin. All other methods, simple one line filter in the functions.php file or a third party plugin will not work. For the filter we do know that it is the intention to provide a new version/name for this once Gutenberg is in core and perhaps the third party plugins depend on this filter somewhere in their code. It does beg the question though is the Classic/TinyMCE Editor still extant in core. It is a question that needs to be answered as we have been led to believe that this is what we have been told previously. Automatic core team has been a bit vague on this. Knowing what those options are going to be would be very helpful for those of us who need to continue working with the current editor for the foreseeable future
Of course the other caveats are my usual bug bears namely the lack of attention for the code view both in general and for each individual block. Code badly formatted, often minimised and could do with a bit of love by providing an IDE text editor like environment for it to be more useful. Code mirror was recently introduced to WordPress and it needs to be developed further and pushed into more corners of WordPress.
While blocks are useful they don’t always work well for many use cases, namely data entry and simple text editing. The current editor affords the ability to add custom field groups in metaboxes that can be arranged and hidden into whatever configuration suits the given workflow at the time. This includes the settings panels for Featured Image categories etc. To date the standard controls in Gutenberg are static; you can’t move Featured Image or Categories. And a bug remains whereby if there are no metaboxes below the content you can’t manoeuvre any from the right sidebar to below that location and likewise if you don’t have any no standard panel in the right side bar you can’t move a panel from below the content to that location. The only workaround at the moment is to edit the interface through the classic editor.
For simple text editing an option to allow users to work with a single classic block as default for a new post/page would go along way to winning over users who only need this basic method to add content and don’t initially want to go down the block route. On top of this the ability to de-block content to one classic block would be a convenience on many levels. One that comes to mind is where a developer wants to radically re-do the layout of a page.
On the layout side of things, Blocks need to do a lot more for structure, sections, rows, columns, flex etc. Some third party vendors have made some efforts but I have found these buggy and really it should be the purview of Gutenberg to provide a common foundation and API for theme, plugins and builders to sit upon. Too often I encounter the error block with third party blocks and the options never resolve the issue. It’s a case of discard and start over.
I’ll move onto the the features which are not bad. The new button in the tool bar does help a little to locate blocks but you should be able to find these directly in the content.
The columns block is now improved with padding on the front and now responsive. A bit more work though still needs to be done on spacing and the mind boggles why blocks haven’t had padding and margin strings from the get go.My test site used Divi and while, as has been highlighted, many elements from third party plugins/themes that previously appeared in Gutenberg are missing, I found with Classic Editor plugin activated, that everything behaved nicely. I could opt to run with the Classic Editor for Divi pages and custom post types or just do a Gutenberg page. This separation of church and state works well which begs the question why Gutenberg is being implemented and introduced to WordPress users in such a crack handed manner.
The on-boarding tactic has been all wrong which, incidentally, falls under the remit of UX.
We would be better served if Gutenberg was only default on new installs, had a simple filter controlled by a switch in Writing settings to enable/disable Gutenberg/Classic Editor. There is no need for an extra plugin in the form of the Classic Editor plugin.The one immediate issue that needs to be tackled is the on page UX. targeting and manipulation of blocks is rife with pitfalls which is a shame as it detracts from the usefulness of Gutenberg. From experience many of these hiccups lead to bad results and is the one reason Gutenberg will fail for the vast majority of users, either because they are not used to such esoteric interfaces or because it is perceived that Gutenberg is not as sophisticated or stable as the current builder already on the market.
It’s a shame as some of the interface and the ideas behind Gutenberg are quite exciting.
UPDATE: Disable Gutenberg is updated and now works with WP 5.
And, digging around in Classic Editor plugin I found the following:
add_filter( ‘use_block_editor_for_post_type’, ‘__return_false’, 100 );
Adding this to the functions.php file ( preferably a child theme ) disables Gutenberg in WordPress 5, no need for a plugin.
You can pre-populate this filter into current 4.9.8 versions so they are ready when WP is officially launched.
Caveats: the above filter won’t disable the plugin version of Gutenberg and we could see another name change to the filter.
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Disable Gutenberg] Gutenberg filterDigging around in Classic Editor plugin I found the following:
add_filter( ‘use_block_editor_for_post_type’, ‘__return_false’, 100 );
Adding this to the functions.php file ( preferably a child theme ) disables Gutenberg in WordPress 5, no need for a plugin.
You can pre-populate this filter into current 4.9.8 versions so they are ready when WP is officially launched.
Caveats: the above filter won’t disable the plugin version of Gutenberg and we could see another name change to the filter.
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Gutenberg] How can we resize the editor in WP 5.0 beta1Hi Nick,
If you are using the following code make sure to add !important after the max-width value. It worked for me.
function wp436784723890_expand_gutenberg_edit_area() { ?> <style type="text/css"> .edit-post-visual-editor .editor-post-title__block, .edit-post-visual-editor .editor-block-list__block { max-width: 1080px !important; } </style> <?php } add_action( 'admin_head', 'wp436784723890_expand_gutenberg_edit_area' );- This reply was modified 7 years, 6 months ago by Marius L. J.. Reason: Added code tags for readability
I upped the star rating to 4. I may have been skewed by my impressions of Gutenberg, which will remain at zero(1 star) till they get things right.
None of the builders can have IDE code editing as far as I know because they depend on TinyMCE/core implementing. There are exceptions. In Gutenberg it looks like the HTML block uses code mirror. Likewise Divi uses it in the code module.
Behind the scenes Gutenberg relies a lot on TinyMCE which is a variant of the full blown version of what Tiny provides as a subscription. Generally TinyMCE does not have a code view at all. For this additional feature you need to subscribe to anther pricey plugin. It is not available to WordPress user either and from what I can see is possibly not as good as code mirror. The text tab for code view in the current backend editor is a WordPress implementation. It is a bit blurred in terms of what TinyMCE is and how much of it we get in WordPress which is obviously not the totality, seeing as we as the end user pay nothing for it. The TinyMCE Advanced plugin give us extra functionality all right.
There is in depth co-operation between Tiny and the Gutenberg team, the vested interest reflecting the 30% + share of the web market that WordPress has. If you look at the Froala editor it has a fairly decent code view option and with full screen is useful. Again though if you want full functionality, you need to pay big bucks. The free version is not much use if you want to code. I am not sure what hurdles are involved in attaching a proper code editor to the Gutenberg editor. It may be a bridge to far but I would like to think that at least somebody would try.
On the overall philosophy of Gutenberg. I think the idea to change and what it could do is very interesting and much needed. I just think that it has gone down a dead end now in how it focused on the granular level of elements of paragraphs, images and headers to the detriment of the layout elements. The under developed column module speaks volumes.
I would have thought that providing the fundamentals of layout in the form of sections/rows/columns and/or flex etc. should have been a priority affording a good foundation for switching themes without unexpected results. On this foundation would be the basics of adjustable paddings and margins for spacing and then, on top of this a very good API for page builders to add all their own bells and whistles and custom interfaces. This would also cater for single layout block instances.
This basic Gutenberg/WordPress install would cover enough for most people to comfortably build a site without too much stress but instead we have issues targeting all the block elements and unexpected bugs. What I find ironic is that we are encouraged to avoid the mystery meat of shortcodes while, in its current guise, Gutenberg is the biggest piece of mystery meat I have seen in a while in terms of software for general consumption.
We also have talk of a fork, but this is as bonkers as the notion of Brexit, though at this stage I am not sure which is more bonkers. We really need to hope that the Gutenberg design can be resolved to work properly.
On testing. The errors I observed were not tied to any one block and I did experience them prior to testing Kadence. I will test a bit more over the next few weeks and let you know if I spot anything in particular.
I have. Sent plenty of feedback to the Gutenberg team, like many others, only to have it fall on deaf ears.
Some of my criticisms:
____
The whole Classic Editor plugin approach is very clumsy and unnecessary considering that Gutenberg is in effect just a react override of the current editor, much like enabling a builder plugin might work. The only difference is that Gutenberg takes over the whole backend interface.
Fom my understanding all the workings of the current editor will be extant in WordPress 5 with Gutenberg activated as the de-facto default editor. It is feasible therefore that only new installs would activate Gutenberg with a switch in writing settings to trigger a Gutenberg -> true/false filter.
There is in fact a filter that can be dropped into the functions.php file of a theme that prevents Gutenberg from being active on all posts. At the moment the folks behind Gutenberg have stated that that filter will get a name change once Gutenberg is folded into core. To date that name change has not occurred and no guarantee that there will even be a name change. This suggests an element of control in the Gutenberg camp. Having a concrete filter would make it feasible for theme vendor to use it saving their users being dropped into Gutenberg.
I have been using and testing Gutenberg for a while now and some plugin developers have gone to great efforts to make blocks that potentially could be very useful. What lets them down is Gutenberg itself. The bugginess of the configurations, especially if you use it on a theme that wasn’t built for Gutenberg suggests that a complete separation of only using Gutenberg on new builds with Gutenberg specific themes and plugins is the only route.
I use Divi for work and this make Gutenberg redundant for me. But I do see a better built Gutenberg being a good starting point for those new to WordPress, web design and development. My understanding is that Gutenberg was supposed to be unifying in that it would provide a common foundation for content and make changing theme less painful. In many respect it does none of this because it has gone in the opposite direction of layout towards micromanaging more granular elements.
And there are many other issues that need to be resolved like where do all the custom fields go if metaboxes are an after thought. There is a all in blocks solution which potentially could work down the road. Providing a mechanism to only have one classic block for basic content creation and/or a de-block mechanism to take everything back to a singe classic block are two other important pr-requisits to making Gutenberg more usable.
The biggie though is something that Gutenberg share with the current editor and that is the lack of a proper code view. its a big bug bear for me and always has been. I like the fact that in Gutenberg you can target the html in each block. The big let down is that it is often not human readable. It needs to be more like an IDE as a work environment with colour syntax highlighting, proper formatting with nested indentations and perhaps code completions and code folding. We see how this achievable with Froala editor and Code Pen. Recently WordPress introduced Code MIrror and what we need is further development of this and for it to be used in far more places other than the HTML block. This would go some way to making working with blocks and how it handles delineation with comment tags more useable and palatable.
_____
On the bugginess and block disintegration, to be honest I have been hammering Gutenberg switching between themes etc… I wouldn’t be too worried at this stage as a lot of these issues should be ironed out with time. I am sure that Gutenberg will become more robust. In the meantime…they shouldn’t make it default and I don’t mean this in a bad way. There is always a place to push out new software to make it grow, take feedback and improve. We had this when OS X replaced the older mac operating system. it took up to five years for Apple to get the new operating system mature enough to be adopted by most users.
A few quick things on the interface in you block settings. You have the three device (desktop, Tablet, Mobile) selectors a the top. I would expect that when clicking these would animate the content down to reflect previews for those breakpoints. Maybe that’s something that is coming in phase two for the customiser in Gutenberg? I am not sure if you are familiar with Divi. In the visual builder on the front end in the settings panels, each section operates like an accordion, only the settings you are working on are open, all others are closed. It affords a less busy workspace and makes it easier to find what you are looking for. Again, probably something for Gutenberg to get right.
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Gutenberg] Gutenberg Image and Title on Same LineUnfortunately Gutenberg falls between two stools. It suffers from the many things it can’t do and doesn’t want to do. It suffers from features and enhancements that should have been added to WordPress years ago and have not been added in Gutenberg (proper IDE like code editing). It suffers from things that should have been addressed years ago and have addressed by third party themes and plugins for many years now (front end, real time, exactly what you want visual builders).
For the use case you describe above you either need to use a page builder that will allow you do properly customise your own layouts or a theme that matches your layout requirements.
While there are many aspects to Gutenberg that are laudable, it doesn’t go for enough in the game of catch up it thinks it is playing.
- This reply was modified 7 years, 7 months ago by irishetcher.
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Gutenberg] Version 3.9 ChangelogAlso, very annoying that if you enter a post then navigate away you get a warning to update, even if you made no changes.
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Gutenberg] Just when you thought Gutenberg might just be workableYep, same here. As instructed here is the error they ask us to copy!
TypeError: Cannot read property ‘getEditedPostAttribute’ of undefined
at http://divitoolset:8888/wp-content/plugins/wordpress-seo/js/dist/wp-seo-post-scraper-810.min.js?ver=8.1:1:147416
at n (http://divitoolset:8888/wp-content/plugins/wordpress-seo/js/dist/wp-seo-wp-globals-backport-810.min.js?ver=8.1:17:235873)
at new r (http://divitoolset:8888/wp-content/plugins/wordpress-seo/js/dist/wp-seo-wp-globals-backport-810.min.js?ver=8.1:17:236096)
at yh (http://divitoolset:8888/wp-content/plugins/gutenberg/vendor/react-dom.min.82e21c65.js:97:111)
at lg (http://divitoolset:8888/wp-content/plugins/gutenberg/vendor/react-dom.min.82e21c65.js:120:88)
at mg (http://divitoolset:8888/wp-content/plugins/gutenberg/vendor/react-dom.min.82e21c65.js:120:386)
at gc (http://divitoolset:8888/wp-content/plugins/gutenberg/vendor/react-dom.min.82e21c65.js:127:202)
at vb (http://divitoolset:8888/wp-content/plugins/gutenberg/vendor/react-dom.min.82e21c65.js:126:230)
at ub (http://divitoolset:8888/wp-content/plugins/gutenberg/vendor/react-dom.min.82e21c65.js:126:65)
at zd (http://divitoolset:8888/wp-content/plugins/gutenberg/vendor/react-dom.min.82e21c65.js:124:449)Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Gutenberg] I need an older version of GutenbergYou can go to this link and down the bottom you can chose the version to install:
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Gutenberg] Why comment tags for blocks?Hi Birgit,
As requested, I got some time today to post some of my suggestions over on gitHub.
If you are wondering about the context of the comment before this one, it was a reply to somebody’s spam attempt to direct me to their “How to make your own block” tutorial. I think Marius removed that one.
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Gutenberg] Why comment tags for blocks?Thanks. Sometime in the Winter months, if we get snowed in again, I’ll have a look through the workings of custom blocks.
Forum: Reviews
In reply to: [Gutenberg] Gutenberg futuristic editor & pagebuilderThanks MK for going to the trouble of explaining all that. It makes sense to me now in terms of the factors you listed. You are taking a very precise approach to this going by the methodology used whereas I am looking at specific pain points related to workflows that I use for specific use cases and which I have been using for a long time with the current editor. Currently these aren’t achievable with the way Gutenberg currently functions.
It wouldn’t take much to bring some of the functionality back into the picture and maintain the concept of working with blocks, which I do see as being very useful. In addition I feel there are some missed opportunities that would add extra value and that should have been added to the current editor years ago. I have already posted these ideas elsewhere.
Forum: Reviews
In reply to: [Gutenberg] Gutenberg futuristic editor & pagebuilderHi MKSnMKS,
What are the 8 factors/criteria you are using? They would be a good benchmark. And, have you assessed the current editor based on the same factors?
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Gutenberg] Why comment tags for blocks?Yes if Gutenberg ultimately provides a solid foundation for page layout -> sections/rows/columns, flex or even grid, it would make a lot of sense, especially if it provided a good API for page builders to add their own bells and whistles and interfaces, which at this stage are a lot superior to what you get with Gutenberg.
If you take this further to the Visual Builder on the front end in Divi you end up seeing that this is where you will actually find a real WYSIWYG experience. It make me wonder why Gutenberg is coy about not wanting to be a page builder. There are a lot more benefits to this than what it trying to be at the moment.
I am sure Nick is aware of the potential but I can’t see how Gutenberg and blocks are of benefit to Divi until the right structures are added to GB. With such structure in place it would be time to ditch the shortcodes. It would be a bit of work for Elegant Themes but they would be wise to act as other vendors will.
I remember when Apple moved from OS 9 (Classic) to OS X. They provided many ways to work with these. You could dual boot into either or you could run the OS 9 applications in the true blue environment built into OSX. Many users who were dedicated to workflows tied to OS 9 took years to adopt OS X. Personally I had no issues with OSX because I was new to computers at the time. I could see all the pain points that effected the Classic users and there were a fair amount of bugs which workarounds had to be found for. It took at least five years for Apple to get everybody on board with OS X. Thing is though, they gave users choice for those years, listened and acted on the feedback and didn’t dump OS 9 until OS X was on par with features or improved alternatives.
This makes me wonder why forcing in Gutenberg as the de-facto default is such a wise move so early. Calling the current editor classic and making users add a plugin to disable Gutenberg has a hint of deprecation. It scares a lot of the pro and loyal users and creates a lot of anger. Granted there was some of this with the OS 9 to OS X change but nothing as heated as far as I remember.
Let’s see what happens.
- This reply was modified 7 years, 9 months ago by irishetcher.
- This reply was modified 7 years, 9 months ago by irishetcher.