[TYPO3-hci] devilish details - improvement suggestions

[Uschi Renziehausen]

Irene Höppner wrote:
>> - no page targets like PAGE_TARGET = xy - should not be necessary. 
>> There are many places where default content elements have strange 
>> targets, that bloats the code.
> +1 (frames are outdated)
+10

>> - no default blurlink() outputted - not necessary for most projects
> +1 but not very important
+100
In my eyes this is very important. The blurlink function causes a major 
accessibility issue, because it prevents each and every IE-User from 
using the TAB-key for browsing through the links on a page. As soon as a 
link gets the focus it looses it again, and therefore those users will 
be unable to browse the site.
As it is, each single admin/developer, who wants to produce accessible 
websites,
1) has to be aware of this fact, and quite a few are not.
2) (if a newbie) has to find out that there is an option noBlur = 1
3) must not forget to add this option to every single menu

>> - no default doctype, does not hurt if not present and can be set 
>> manually very easy
> -1
-1

>> - in general - no default output except the typo3 message in the header
> -1 (i'm not sure, which other default output you don't like... there is 
> really not much...)

Perhaps it would be a good idea to keep the head element clean and 
readable by setting the following two values as default:
config.inlineStyle2TempFile = 1
config.removeDefaultJS = external

At least I do not see a reason why someone should like to have tons of 
code repeated on every single page.

>>
>> TEMPLATE
>> move setup field above constants - i guess 95% of the people use this 
>> field more often.
> 
> -1 because constants are - when used - required for setup. Means: you 
> have to add first the constant and then use it in setup. If done like 
> you suggest, setup would have to be the first field in the form, which 
> pobably would not increase usability.

0 I personally do not care. The list of options I have is not too long, 
and after a few hours I had the order in mind and my mouse (a very 
intelligent little creature) finds the way to "setup" by heart.

What I really would appreciate are changes in the following situation: I 
  am busy somewhere in the page tree, then realise, i need to change 
something in my (TS) template. So I choose Web->Template, and what do I get?

First of all a warning marked red:
<snip>
No template
There was no template on this page!
Create a template record first in order to edit constants!
</snap>

Then two options declared as warning by an exclamation mark on yellow 
background (looks dangerous):
1) create new website
2) create an extension template

Finally, hardly recognizable beneath all those warnings
3) Go to closest page with template

I am not experienced enough to judge what is needed most, but if it was 
up to me, i would reverse the order to something like this:
<ul>
   <li>Go to closest page with template</li>
   <li>Create an extension template</li>
   <li>Create a new site</li>
<ul>
Then beneath that a note with short, but understandable explanation what 
  is the effect of these options. This "Please note" could be red perhaps.


>>
>> EXTENSIONS
>> remove the wrapped div of extensions by default. I had many cases 
>> where this breaked my code and added unnecessary complexity. Well done 
>> extensions and templates (and thats what we want, do we?) don´t need 
>> fancy default styles. Most things can be easily done with a well made 
>> "masterstylesheet".
> ----1 You can remove it easily in your own extensions. I want to be able 
> to style extensions depending on that div, and I pretty often need that 
> (complex layouts)

0 due to lack of experience I cannot judge.

>>
>> RTE
>> if RTE edit in HTML mode nothing of the output should be touched 
>> (except filtering <script> maybe).
> what do you mean? Do nothing before saving to the database or do nothing 
> before outputting in the frontend? I disagree with the last, because i 
> like that in textarea fields ppl can add things like <link 
> 132>slfjsdl</link> and the output is transformed to a correct link.
> If you need your HTML-Output use the HTML-Content Element, not the RTE.

I do not agree with both of you, but configuring all those RTE related 
transformations is a pain in the ... and, perhaps more important, the 
need to switch to HTML-mode should be reduced as much as possible. This 
is a 'condicio sine qua non'. But this deserves another thread. I will 
open one up soon.
To Irene: using HTML-Content Element does not help, because then you do 
not get any transformation at all.

>>
>> For 5.0:
>> A system that "feels" css 2.0 XHTML. Right now Typo3 still shows 
>> everywhere that its roots are html 4.0 with its disadvantages.
> +1
+1

Ciao, Uschi