Positions in sample data and core templates

[elin]

Hi,

One of the issues that we have to make decisions on in position names
to be used in sample data and the templates distributed with core.
There are a few interconnected issues.

1. The sample data needs to work both with Milky Way and with the
positions in the new templates.

2. Milky Way creates a few issues:
a. It doesn't have enough positions for what several of the people
working on templates would like (for example see Beez 2)
b. There are some semantic names (e.g. right, left) that quickly
become non semantic when other templaters want to use sample data but
with a different kind of layout (like two columns on the right).

3. Lots of people have existing sites and existing templates which use
the 1.5 core positions. However, you can't assume that because a
position names in their databases match a name in the 1.5 core
templates that it actually is intended to work in the same way.

As Angie mentioned in her email, she has used generic position names.
I like this because it solves the problems in #2 by adding positions
and avoiding the possibility of degradation of semantic naming. I
believe that she has also been discussing the extra positions issue
with some of the other people working on templates. However, if we
have sample data which use the new position names with Milky Way it
won't display modules, and right now the sample data, which until now
have used the Milky Way positions, don't display in Beez 2.

So, I see a few options.

1.We could add references to the new positions to Milk Way.
2. We could add references to the Milky Way positions in the new
templates (and this might make it easier for people with 1.5 old
templates and migrated data).
3. We could have two sets of sample modules on that goes to the new
positions and one that goes to the Milky Way positions (it's not that
many). But that kind of defeats the point of showing how the same data
can be displayed differently by using different templates.

I'm leaning toward 1 combined with documentation about how to cope if
you have data with old position names.

What do people think? What am I missing?

Elin

[Niels Braczek]

elin schrieb:

> 1.We could add references to the new positions to Milk Way.
> 2. We could add references to the Milky Way positions in the new
> templates (and this might make it easier for people with 1.5 old
> templates and migrated data).
> 3. We could have two sets of sample modules on that goes to the new
> positions and one that goes to the Milky Way positions (it's not that
> many). But that kind of defeats the point of showing how the same data
> can be displayed differently by using different templates.

For me, option 1 makes most sense, too. Positions should only state
*what*, not *where*.

Regrads,
Niels

[Angie Radtke]

Hi Niels,

> Positions should only state *what*

In a custom project you are totally right.
I prefer then namens like main main / submenu /search etc.
So the people who are resonsible for the content know what they did.

But the core-templates are a model for varoius projects.
We never know how they will bestructured.
For exapmple someone wants to place the mod_banner where I add the news. If
the position is named mod_article_news it's confusing if the mod_banner is
placed there.
This was the reason for generic names, it's more flexible.

And if you have got a custom project it's very easy to adapt the names for
your needs.

Bye Angie

[Matt Thomas]

@Elin - thank you for bringing this up. I've been wondering about module position names myself for some time and have even engaged others on the subject of standardizing them at http://forum.joomla.org/viewtopic.php?f=466&t=444773 .

Based on the feedback that I received, which was not much, and more on my personal experiences with building templates, a template framework, and conversations with others like Waseem Sadiq, the Milky Way position names seem to be the benchmark others have defaulted to. I would love for us to craft meaningful, semantic position names, but as Angie rightfully points out, they need to be generic enough to be flexible in their use and meaning.

Now is a great opportunity to address this issue as many will follow the naming convention put forth. Those affected by this change would be template developers that use the sample data that ships with Joomla. Since they are most likely developing one-off templates, that shouldn't be an issue for them. Most template clubs use their own sample data anyway.

That said, I believe it would be best to establish a new set of generic position names and go with option 1 and retrofit the Milky Way template.

Does this now open up debate on what those names should be?

Best,

Matt

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB.

[Angie Radtke]

Hi Matt,

 

we want to make it easy.

Calling them position-1 ; position-2 etc

 

 

bye Angie

 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: joomla-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:joomla-...@googlegroups.com]Im Auftrag von Matt Thomas
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. April 2010 13:53
An: joomla-...@googlegroups.com
Betreff: Re: Positions in sample data and core templates

[Matt Thomas]

Hi Angie,

Sounds good to me. I can't think of an easier naming convention.

Keep up the great work!

Best,

Matt

[Luis M@ster]

Hello!

I agree that the positions are generic name referring to their
position. eg see this wireframe, which is part of a framework I am
creating for joomla 1.6, maybe this will be of assistance.

http://iwebdevelope.com/wf-01-sample.jpg
Regards

[Christophe Demko]

I think that the names 'left' and 'right' have no sense in the context
of RTL language. I prefer the use of 'primary' and 'secondary'

[Phil E. Taylor]

Of course they do!

Even with a RTL language: Right is still right and left is still left
:-) :-) ;-)

Or is this an April fools :-)

[Luis M@ster]

I understand what Christophe is concerned, but Right and Left, two
positions are standard on all engines templates, change or delete the
name, it would be a bad idea, any person who has no experience in
templates, you know that there are two 5 basic positions.

1 - Header
2 - Body
3 - left
4 - Right
5 - Footer.

:-)

Note: sorry for my bad English ;-)

>  smime.p7s
> 6 KVerDescargar

[G. D. Speer]

'Left' and 'Right' perpetuates the non-semantic naming issue. As Elin
proposes, it
would be better to be generic and avoid use of position/location
terminology in naming just as it's good to avoid function-based names.

In your own layout image, left is not at the left location and therefore it
is
inapt.

True semantic naming for use layout general purpose space names.
Christophe is correct that 'primary' and 'secondary' are highly
semantic and indicate neither their function or their placement;
simply their hierarchy so that can be inserted in any template at
any point on the page.

Using "bar" can help define whether content needs a certain aspect ratio.
Such as main, sidebar1, sidebar2.
The User1, User2 convention works quite well across many designs.
(Banner1, banner2 is a well received exception in that it's sizing is
determined by
industry-wide ad specs. Navbar, Navmenu, Search, Identity, and Login tend
to be allowed functional position names simply because they require
highly precise and unigue layout and styling.
FWIW

:-)

--

[Luis M@ster]

I understand you, but you just are watching him from the standpoint of
a programmer, not from the point of view of a designer or end user.

Mostly all staff development companies use names for referring to the
positions of the modules, this is because it is easier for a designer
or an end user to understand and memorize the architecture of a
template.

wanted not agree with me, but user1, user2, user3, creating the
template creates much confusion.

If you want to look at the positions of the modules of Rockttheme,
yootheme, shape5, Gavick and templateplazza.

Regards,

[dukeofgaming]

I agree, in my very first approach to Joomla years ago I had a little trouble figuring it out.

I'd also go for: container or placeholder, but since "module position" is somewhat of a term in Joomla context, position is the most appropriate think one could think of.

Just a thoought here, what if it was a convention to use "position" as a suffix, instead of a prefix?, meaning:

user-position, banner-position, right-position, left-position, top-position, footer-position, and so forth

[elin]

In my first Mambo site I remember using Planetfall (ah nostalgia)
which had the right column to the left of the left column. Well, it
taught me that position names are essentially arbitrary strings, i'll
give you that, but it was incredibly puzzling for a beginner :). The
truth is people play around with positions in the core templates and
modify them tremendously. So that's why my preference is to make them
totally generic. Then in an actual site you would probably change them
to reflect either what they do or where they are or who sees them
depending on your preferences.

@Andy M, that is still a beautiful template.

Elin

On Apr 1, 5:11 pm, dukeofgaming <dukeofgam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree, in my very first approach to Joomla years ago I had a little
> trouble figuring it out.
>
> I'd also go for: container or placeholder, but since "module position" is
> somewhat of a term in Joomla context, position is the most appropriate think
> one could think of.
>
> Just a thoought here, what if it was a convention to use "position" as a
> suffix, instead of a prefix?, meaning:
>
> user-position, banner-position, right-position, left-position, top-position,
> footer-position, and so forth
>

> > > joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com<joomla-dev-cms%2Bunsubscribe@go oglegroups.com>

> > .
> > > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> > groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms?hl=en-GB.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
> > To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com<joomla-dev-cms%2Bunsubscribe@go oglegroups.com>

[Christophe Demko]

Yes of course, but in LTR language, the 'left' position is the main
position. In RTL language, the 'right' position is the main position.
So if in our samples data, we decide to publish a module in a 'main'
position: should it be in the 'left' or in the 'right' ?

If we have a 'primary' and a 'secondary' position, it makes sense:
'primary' position will be in the left side in LTR languages and in
the right side for RTL languages.

Ch.D

>  smime.p7s
> 6KAfficherTélécharger

[Luis M@ster]

lol, I remembered the old time mambo, I had many frustrations,
creating my first templates :-).

Based on my frustrations to mambo, I have given my suggestions, I
agree that the names must be generic, but user1, user2 user3, brings a
lot of confusion, we must move in the template engine and not stay as
long as same.

Using the traditional names for me no problem, I can change at any
time by my great experience developing templates, but think of the new
joomla users.

Regards.

[Mark Dexter]

Hi all. I have the "advantage" of still being a novice on template stuff, so maybe I will chime in here with my .02. If there is some useful information to be communicated about the shape or typical usage of a position, I would think that would be more helpful than a pure generic. So I would think something like sidebar1,2,3, header1,2,3, footer1,2,3,  and so forth might be preferable to just "position-1,2,3".  Mark

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.

[Matt Thomas]

On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Luis M@ster <luism...@iwebdevelope.com> wrote:

... I agree that the names must be generic, but user1, user2 user3, brings a lot of confusion

Absolutely. Many new users are confused by these names. I suspect, though, that it may be due to the fact that were other positions with position-based/function-based names such as header, footer ...etc.

We need to keep in mind that this conversation is in context of the sample data, which could even include an article on why the use of very generic position names and how to change them.

I'm honestly not sure if there is a single good solution for this.

Best,

Matt

[G. D. Speer]

I put the User series in the note primarily because Kyle and other template designers

argued heavily for it so that pages would have content if a template that has the additional positions User1,2,3 or Position1,2,3 is selected for display, the sample data would fill it.

 

If we can just get Left Right removed from the vocabulary due to being non-semantic, that would be great.

 

+1 for simply designating positions by importance and primary-sidebar and secondary-sidebar does that as does other synonyms to primary, secondary such as content-main, content-additional, related, etc.

 

This re-raises the suggestion to have a position translator table in the template manager - so that when a template is selected, it identifies modules that do not have a defined position in that template and accepts a redirection.  e.g. with Template "1.5Old" active, modules in undefined position 'sidebar' should be rendered to position 'Left'.  If Template "1.6Demo" is active, modules in undefined position 'sidebar1' should be rendered to position 'Primary_Sidecolumn'.  Pick whatever names you want - this facilitates switching templates without having to edit the layout to rename positions.  This reduces the need for standardizing the position naming scheme.

----- Original Message -----

From: Matt Thomas

To: joomla-...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 11:59 AM

Subject: Re: Positions in sample data and core templates

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.

[ChuckL]

I agree that this issue is not a simple one to resolve, at least not
one that offers a perfect solution. Having created quite a few J1.5
templates I have developed a standard naming convention for block
positions in all my templates that is, for the most part, generic. I
start with the notion that I have three basic areas or blocks on any
page: header, content, and footer. I then divide those areas into any
number of positioned block elements whose names are header1,
header2,... content1, content2,... footer1, footer2...

While this may not be a perfect semantic-free solution, it does offer
a bit of clarity as far as intent and general placement. While the
basic areas have semantic names, the names carry no positional meaning
(one could position the header below the content or the footer at the
top, etc.) The smaller internal blocks are semantically connected to
the basic block but again could actually be positioned anywhere. There
is no order or direction that can be derived from the names.

One additional thought that might help would be to give the
administrator the ability to add aliases to positions that would
semantically describe the block's usage.

Just a thought.

Regards,

Chuck

On Apr 2, 10:59 am, Matt Thomas <m...@betweenbrain.com> wrote:

[Luis M@ster]

Hi Matt!

I understand your concern, but I'm sure this will not affect the
duties, by choosing appropriate names mind, of any form if there is a
function with the name of a position would not affect anything, for
two simple reasons.

1 - a function to execute php code would be: { $this-> content_top
(); }

2 - to call a position would be:
{
<jdoc:include type="modules" name="content_top" style="xhtml" />

OR

<? php if ($ this-> countModules ('content_top')):?>
<div class="span-24">
<jdoc:include type="modules" name="content_top" style="xhtml" />
</ div>
<? php endif;?>}

Joomla private functions and most of the extensions, do not use these
types of names.

if someone were to use content_top as the name of a function would use
this.
{
function addContentTop()
function displayContentTop()
function ContentTop()
}

For most logical that I seek, a name of a position would not affect a
function with the same name, if I am in error can be corrected.

I agree with that name are, header1, content1, slidebar1, top1 or
others.

Regards,

On 2 abr, 13:59, Matt Thomas <m...@betweenbrain.com> wrote:

[elin]

Wow I love the idea of being able to assign an alias to a position.

I do expect sample data to include an explanation about positions and
why whatever names we are choosing are chosen. Also, I would like to
include an image for each of the core templates showing the locations
of the positions (you can see already that there is space for
typography for each and front page for each). Sample data are intended
mainly to be educational/informative as well as to provide a basis for
troubleshooting (and running system/functional tests). But I do think
that the core positions take on a life of their own. Maybe going
generic would actually encourage people to rename.

We could definitely publish and link a suggested mapping of old names
to new names (and retrofitting Milky Way would provide a model for
this), but of course there are lots and lots of situations where
modules are put in positions not defined in any template xml or in the
xml of a given template (on a site where multiple templates are used).
In no way would I try to automate that for anyone besides myself, and
only for myself because I understand my own naming systems. Obviously
if you are someone who uses loadposition on a regular basis then you
have lots of positions that never show up in any template and that's
intentional.

Some templates don't have sidebars. Some templates don't have headers.
We'd like to make it easy for sample data to work for them too.

I think I will give retrofitting Milky Way with the Beez positions a
try and see how it goes, then people can look at it and give some
feedback.

Elin

> > Matt- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Luis M@ster]

Hi Elin!

Here I send you a link to the wire frame of rhuk milkyway template and
new names of the positions I have suggested, I hope this helps.
http://iwebdevelope.com/wireframe-rhukmilkyway-newposition.png

Regards,
Luis M. Espinosa

[Christophe Demko]

Hi Luis,
I think your names are in the right way.

Ch.D

On 3 avr, 18:21, "Luis M@ster" <luismas...@iwebdevelope.com> wrote:
> Hi Elin!
>
> Here I send you a link to the wire frame of rhuk milkyway template and

> new names of the positions I have suggested, I hope this helps.http://iwebdevelope.com/wireframe-rhukmilkyway-newposition.png

[Luis M@ster]

Thanks Christophe!

[elin]

Oh thanks .... while I was offline i also did a mapping using the
totally generic ones which I'm going to commit to the sample_data
branch once I get it updated etc. I really really like that wireframe,
very clean and easy to read. Would be nice to have one of those for
each template.

Elin

[Luis M@ster]

Thanks, what are the other template?