[TYPO3] 5th column?

[Erik Svendsen]

Hello Tapio,

> Erik Svendsen wrote:
> 
>> I don't think many want to kill the classic page module, it has its
>> uses (and a lot of users/developers are used to it). But a lot of us
>> are moving away from the traditional table based column approach for
>> websites, to a tableless content area approach
>> 
> that has nothing to do with modern template building /TemplaVoila
> except the word 'Column' - the word itself is misleading because
> Column = content area.

The history of the classic page module is table based design.
 
>> (I did it two years ago). And some of us find TV as the best way to
>> template this kind of approach.
>> 
> no difference except naming convention - it is possible to create
> tabelles desing for the standar page module.

It hasn't anything to do with what you can do with the MTB approach, but 
that I (and I think others to), find the TV approach more intiutive and logical 
when working with tableless design.
 
>> Also because you can give the users/editors easy names for the area
>> 
> true - endeed you can rename colum names of the standard page module.
>
> , like top content, left box, middle content, right box, bottom

But I find it easier to do when mapping the HTML-templates.
 
>> content (who maybe tells more than left, main, right etc). And you
>> can nest elements.
>> 
> modern template building has easily tree levels - main template -
> content area template - content element template (using some plugin).
> I have *newer* needed more and I can't image that I newer need more

But it still hasn't the same opportunity for nesting as TV. And FCE gives 
opportunities you never want to lose when you have learned the. 
 
>> Maybe you feel that TV is buggy and a bad piece of extensions. But
>> why is it one of the most popular extensions in the TYPO3 world.
>> Could it be that a lot of people see something you don't.
>> 
> maybe - I just don't need it. When I have read messages it seems to
> have more bugs.

Remember TemplaVoila is a new extension compared to classic page module, 
who are from the beginning. But as I said, have never had any problems. Of 
course some with dev-versions, but I only test them to help the developers.

> And I don't like to BE - I can't set the BE interface nice using
> TemplaVoila.

It's okay you don't like it, but out there is a lot of people who have the 
opposite opinion. And don't forget, some editors more and less only are making 
content as newsrecords or elements for calendar eg. 

> It *was* nicer than the old page module but not anymore.

Don't agree, but I like iconbased UI with as little text as possible.

>> And starting with a websites from scratch, for me the easy solution
>> is TV. Then I can make HTML templates with exactly the number of
>> content area I want
>> 
> no problem with the standard page module - you can set as many content
> areas you need - I have define ten content areas for it - and six is
> the maximum I have ever used.

But you have to install tm_contentaccess, who aren't any userfriendly extensions 
for a lot of people. Of course you can make subpart for menus and everything 
with MTB also - its no difference there. 

>> placed where I want, make the CSS, and know when I'm finnished with
>> mapping
>> 
> IMO slow process. When I do the HMLT-template, I know where to put
> content and that's it.

What is slow with this process. I suppose the number of hours from a ready 
HTML template in XHTML with CSS until the page worked wouldn't be much different. 
I actually did a whole redesign on a 200 pages sites in 3 - 4 hours with 
TV. I changed only 10 lines of TS. The time the designer and I used to make 
the design and HTML-templates was maybe 50 hours. And I have done it both 
ways, and don't find any difference in use of time.
 
>> I feel your use of word *hate those people*, telling loud that TV is
>> "crap" (even if some people who really know TYPO3 would say something
>> else), and always pushing tm_contenaccess as the solution for
>> everything
>> 
> no - but I feel that some people are hostile toward MTB - I have red
> that it should be soon dead - that *is* really *hostile* attitude

Don't agree, this isn't hostile, people are only expressing their view of 
what the future of TYPO3 is. Someone want TV to be the only templating engine, 
someone want the flexibility of three different ways (maybe four) of templating, 
and others want Smarty as engine. In every software development, there will 
be discussions about what considered as dead ends. Some see TV as the future, 
and classic page module as a dead end, other want them side by side, and 
maybe others (like me) want them to merge together. But if you see this as 
a hostile approach, it's your problem. And if you want to be a part of the 
community, you have to accept others view without seeing them as hostile.
 
>> about usability (which it isn't, it's only an intermesso until
>> version 4.5/5)
>> 
> agreed - it is just an intermezzo
> 
>> isn't doing anything good
>> 
> no true - endeed I know
> 
>> As I can see, you are still using table design, even with the
>> depreciated HTML 4.0 (use 4.0.1)
>> 
> but that is nothing to do with MTB/TemplaVoila - I don't today do any
> HTML-template. Those, which I get are table-based.

Then you should relearn the people who makes the template. Table based design 
is a bad way to do webpages. Less accessebility, more difficult to redesign 
and so on.
 
Maybe because I have the hand on the whole templating process, I find TV 
the right tool.

And a short note about why I reacted, and made my first post in this thread. 
I find you showing very little respect and attention to others advice. Neither 
you and I can tell which approach is the best for other people. To use statment 
as "it is complety another kind of solution - IMO too complex in most cases." 
isn't any advice at all. Maybe the person already is using TV, then it's 
probably the best solution. Maybe he/she only is in the start of using TYPO3, 
then the advice should be look at both templating method. Maybe the HTML-template 
has 5 columns, but two of them have content direct from other extension or 
only menus (defined in the TS setup). Then you don't need anything more than 
the columns in the classic page module. It's a lot of different solution, 
who could be the right one. 

 
WBR,
Erik Svendsen
www.linnearad.no