TYPO3 Mailingliste: nicht fragen - lesen!

Interesting point. I was told that there is a way of "mixing" both ways
using the Flex Forms for content elements. I realized my first project
with TV! and except of some wrong-doings on my side (changing templates
afterwards inline and using one template for Main Page Template AND for
different FCEs), I am now recieving positive feedback from my editors.

And yes. Sections for repeatable content are fantastic. I love this
concept and I think it makes a lot of templating very easy.

Using a lot of TS is not my target, I am happy when I can avoid this,
reducing it to main configurational purpose for extensions or the main
page template.

Before TV! I did T3 websites using automaketemplate which was also quite
nice. Probably you want to have a look on that.
Other ppl prefer writing their markers directly into the HTML code.

But this depends on their approach doing the whole development. I prefer
to do the complete HTML and CSS stuff before I start with T3 Templating
and implementation. When everybody (mainly client) is happy with the
page and how it works in the target browsers I do the TV! Templating.

The "marker guys" started directly with their common HTML template,
setting markers in the right positions, building and styling the menu
within Typo3 and adding the rest through the "column view" page editor.

Probably someone has other examples or experience regarding this?

Greetings!


Dmitry Dulepov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> shikeb wrote:
>> Thanks, Dmitry and Gideon, for your kind words. I wanted to know
>> whether flexible content elements can be emulated the traditional
>> way. What I mean is that flexible content defines a template for
>> individual elements quite easily which we can later on plug into our
>> page templates anywhere where we are allowed to insert content, just
>> like regular content elements. If I were using markers and all would
>> that be possible? I am just a bit naive in visualizing this so I
>> thought to ask the noble guys of the lists. I have read the mtb's (a
>> long time back) and the ftb documents but I'll re-read them following
>> Dimitry's advice.
>
> I do not think you can emulate sections (repeatable) using MTB. But you
> can emulate simple FCE with [a lot of] TS code and manual selection of
> elements, which is very inconvinient.
>
_______________________________________________
TYPO3-project-templavoila mailing list
TYPO3-project-templavoila (AT) lists...netfielders.de
http://lists.netfielders.de/cgi-bin/...ct-templavoila

Personally, I started with MTB and in my early TYPO3 efforts found it
easier to grasp and get started with. I was satisfied using it and
still think it is a solid way to template a site.

However, earlier this year, I have began using TV and see no reason
to ever go back. Its basics are not too hard to grasp and once you
understand it in depth it gives you so much flexibility and power
particularly through the FCE's and the local processing field.

If you are already successfully templating sites in TV, then I would
question why even consider changing. Is there any kind of advantage
you think it might give you?


Ron Hall
Dallas, Texas

blog: "Adventures in TYPO3" at www.busynoggin.com/blog
web: www.busynoggin.com


On Dec 2, 2006, at 4:51 AM, Dmitry Dulepov wrote:

> Hi!
>
> shikeb wrote:
>> Thanks, Dmitry and Gideon, for your kind words. I wanted to know
>> whether
>> flexible content elements can be emulated the traditional way.
>> What I
>> mean is that flexible content defines a template for individual
>> elements
>> quite easily which we can later on plug into our page templates
>> anywhere
>> where we are allowed to insert content, just like regular content
>> elements. If I were using markers and all would that be possible?
>> I am
>> just a bit naive in visualizing this so I thought to ask the noble
>> guys
>> of the lists. I have read the mtb's (a long time back) and the ftb
>> documents but I'll re-read them following Dimitry's advice.
>
> I do not think you can emulate sections (repeatable) using MTB. But
> you
> can emulate simple FCE with [a lot of] TS code and manual selection of
> elements, which is very inconvinient.
>
> --
> Dmitry Dulepov
>
> Web: http://typo3bloke.net/
> Skype: callto:liels_bugs
>
> "It is our choices, that show what we truly are,
> far more than our abilities." (A.P.W.B.D.)
> _______________________________________________
> TYPO3-project-templavoila mailing list
> TYPO3-project-templavoila (AT) lists...netfielders.de
> http://lists.netfielders.de/cgi-bin/...typo3-project-
> templavoila

_______________________________________________
TYPO3-project-templavoila mailing list
TYPO3-project-templavoila (AT) lists...netfielders.de
http://lists.netfielders.de/cgi-bin/...ct-templavoila

Dmitry Dulepov kirjoitti:
> Hi!
>
> shikeb wrote:
>> Thanks, Dmitry and Gideon, for your kind words. I wanted to know
>> whether flexible content elements can be emulated the traditional
>> way. What I mean is that flexible content defines a template for
>> individual elements quite easily which we can later on plug into our
>> page templates anywhere where we are allowed to insert content, just
>> like regular content elements. If I were using markers and all would
>> that be possible? I am just a bit naive in visualizing this so I
>> thought to ask the noble guys of the lists. I have read the mtb's (a
>> long time back) and the ftb documents but I'll re-read them following
>> Dimitry's advice.
>
> I do not think you can emulate sections (repeatable) using MTB.

kb_nescefe - the version, which I used had a bug in fronted file
(missing termination (}) from a function.
support nested contented elements.
That's simple to use and very userfriendly for end users - IMO simpler
for endusers than flexible content elements of TemplaVoila.
_______________________________________________
TYPO3-project-templavoila mailing list
TYPO3-project-templavoila (AT) lists...netfielders.de
http://lists.netfielders.de/cgi-bin/...ct-templavoila

Dmitry Dulepov kirjoitti:
> Hi!
>
> shikeb wrote:
>> Thanks, Dmitry and Gideon, for your kind words. I wanted to know
>> whether flexible content elements can be emulated the traditional
>> way. What I mean is that flexible content defines a template for
>> individual elements quite easily which we can later on plug into our
>> page templates anywhere where we are allowed to insert content, just
>> like regular content elements. If I were using markers and all would
>> that be possible? I am just a bit naive in visualizing this so I
>> thought to ask the noble guys of the lists. I have read the mtb's (a
>> long time back) and the ftb documents but I'll re-read them following
>> Dimitry's advice.
>
> I do not think you can emulate sections (repeatable) using MTB. But you
> can emulate simple FCE with [a lot of] TS code and manual selection of
> elements, which is very inconvinient.
>

Might be - even if kb_nescefe is easy to use. The problem of 'Flexible
content' is that at the site of end users it is too nerd!
Data Structure: - that is too technical (nerd) term for simple editors.

for kb_nescefe can set names, which are easy to understand by simple end
users.
TemplaVoila has also some other nerd features and other features, which
are not good or are even confusing at the sight of end users.
Because of unsatisfactory solved end user issues, I don't use
TemplaVoila in my projects.
I have tried to make is better for a customer for simple end users.
_______________________________________________
TYPO3-project-templavoila mailing list
TYPO3-project-templavoila (AT) lists...netfielders.de
http://lists.netfielders.de/cgi-bin/...ct-templavoila

Tapio Markula

>> I do not think you can emulate sections (repeatable) using MTB. But
>> you can emulate simple FCE with [a lot of] TS code and manual
>> selection of elements, which is very inconvinient.
>>
>
> Might be - even if kb_nescefe is easy to use. The problem of 'Flexible
> content' is that at the site of end users it is too nerd!
> Data Structure: - that is too technical (nerd) term for simple editors.

+
in addition you must first select data structure,
then reload page and
then you get another as nerd and overtechnical field
Template Object:

At the sight of *simple* end users 2/columns is *must faster*
and also *easy to understand* - it is easy to give human readable
names insted of names, which are more for nerds, develovepers.

The language of TemplaVoila is sometimes very cryptic for simple
end users!
_______________________________________________
TYPO3-project-templavoila mailing list
TYPO3-project-templavoila (AT) lists...netfielders.de
http://lists.netfielders.de/cgi-bin/...ct-templavoila

shikeb kirjoitti:
> Gideon So wrote:
>> Hi Shikeb,
>>
>> IMO, templavoila is the simplest way to build a template. And it
>> is easy to learn. Just check out the futuristic template Building (FTB).
>>
>> Gideon
>>
>> shikeb wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I am a relatively new Typo3 user and so far I've used only
>>> TemplaVoila for all my templating and I've really enjoyed using it
>>> and the idea of Flexible Content elements. But since I haven't used
>>> the older method till now, can any gentleman on this list tell me the
>>> differences between TemplaVoila and other available methods for
>>> creating templates. And the pros and cons and the benefits of using
>>> one technique over the other. Or is there any document available
>>> which I can use for a quick answer to my queries.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Syed S. Rahman.
>
>
> Thanks, Dmitry and Gideon, for your kind words. I wanted to know whether
> flexible content elements can be emulated the traditional way.

can - kb_nescefe - the version, which I used had a bug in fronted file
(missing termination (}) from a function.
That's simple to use and very userfriendly for end users - IMO simpler
for endusers than flexible content elements of TemplaVoila.

Doesn't need any markers.
_______________________________________________
TYPO3-project-templavoila mailing list
TYPO3-project-templavoila (AT) lists...netfielders.de
http://lists.netfielders.de/cgi-bin/...ct-templavoila