[TYPO3-hci] BE vs FE

[Christopher]

Waldemar Kornewald wrote:
> On 8/1/06, JoH <info at cybercraft.de> wrote:

<snip>

> But the main problem with what you say is:
>> newbie editors I have trained
> Do you think those editor would have been able to do anything without
> your training? Somehow this doesn't speak for Typo3's usability.
> Once you can train someone you have eliminated a lot of problems. The
> point is that the CMS should be usable *without training*.

I wondered it this was at the root of this thread. TYPO3 has many areas 
where usability could be improved, but do you think you could possibly 
make a more ridiculous statement if you tried?

Have you even seen any tool more complex than a /hammer/ that was usable 
without training?

In a properly set up BE--have you even seen a TYPO3 BE configured 
specifically for the tasks a user may need to do?--we find it takes 2 to 
3 hours to train a group of 1 to 4 users whose main tasks are to add, 
update, modify and delete content.

A full-fledged TYPO3 administrator or developer obviously takes much 
longer to train, but that has much more to do with the fact that they 
will need to learn some Typoscript than it does with any given part of 
the BE interface.

If it is taking you longer than 3 hours to learn how to use TYPO3 from 
scratch with no instruction, that says very little about the usability 
of the system. Most of the time that goes into setting up a TYPO3 site 
for content editors to use is time spent configuring the system, largely 
to make their use of it smooth and predictable.

>> "Nobody needs this/that" -> How can you know what others might need?
> 
> Scratch the "Nobody". There always is *someone* who needs it.
> How do I know that *most* people don't need it?
> * I see that the concept is not very simple.
> * I tried *lots* of CMSes. I didn't count, but I'm sure I tried at
> least 90% of the open-source CMSes.
> * If I see that most other (powerful) CMSes have found a simpler way
> to solve something then I can be sure that I'm not totally wrong when
> I say "Nobody needs that"

Really? I have never seen any CMS that had implemented as useful a 
distinction as the List/Page module distinction. IMO, Joey has it 
slightly wrong to say that the principle use of these different modules 
is that users can choose which they like and use it instead of the 
other--though this is a useful side effect.

Rather I would say that the Page and List modules satisfy different 
requirements with some overlap:

Working on content /qua/ content, the Page view is likely most 
convenient; you have access to all the items on a page, presented in 
something like their FE arrangement (or at least labelled in such as way 
as to indicate that placement), and edit them one-at-a-time.

Working on database records /qua/ records, the List view is obviously 
more convenient; you can perform complex editing, sorting, moving, 
copying and pasting of multiple records at the same time in the same 
operation. Try changing the titles of 200 pages in any other CMS without 
having to use PhpMyAdmin or a custom SQL query...however you do it, it 
won't be something that a basic website editor can be trained to do 
easily *and* quickly.

I find it a little weird that you don't understand this 
distinction--this is the application/file manager distinction that every 
modern OS has. It's the model where you use a customized application for 
authoring files and a file-manager like the Finder in OSX or Windows 
Explorer on Windows to manage files.

> Sorry if I sound too confident again. I want to make Typo3 easier to
> use and I read that for V4.5 you planned a major overhaul. Now, I'm
> here with my suggestions and nobody wants to change *anything*. All I
> see is that a few expert-concepts and minor changes are being
> discussed. I wouldn't be surprised if V4.5 would look nearly the same
> as V4...
> So, do you want to change and try out new concepts or should I shut up
> because nobody is interested in change, anyway?
> 
>> "Separating FE and BE users is a bad concept" -> How can you know if you
>> didn't even get what they are for (Website Visitors vs. Website Editors)?
> 
> * Visitors and editors are both *users*.

With, according to the TYPO3 paradigm, vastly different roles. As 
mentioned, TYPO3 is /not/ the best framework for interactive, 
community-based sites.

> * Nearly all CMSes don't make such a distinction and there are no problems.

This is relevant how? Many vehicles have four wheels, some have two, 
neither has any particular problems...

> * What is the advantage of having them separate? I still haven't seen
> a good reason.

Consistency of interface, and access to tools that are not practical in 
in-place editing. Plone has this kind of distinction too--eventually you 
need to get into the file structure and outside of the site's layout.

> * It definitely is more complicated. I hope that there is no doubt about 
> that.
> 
> * It is less flexible because as BE user can't login to the FE and FE
> users can't be *easily* granted access to the BE (e.g.: because they
> joined the development team).

As has already been mentioned, this is not the purpose that TYPO3 is 
best used for.

Again, this if this is something your use case requires, unless you have 
truly extraordinary reasons, your best option is going to be to find a 
tool that satisfies it instead of trying to modify an existing system.

<snip a lot of stuff>

By the way--to /whom/ is Plone known for usability? IT can take all 
afternoon to find a simple CSS file that needs changing...


-Christopher