4 ms·
The UI does interfere, you, as a theme developer, have to adjust to it, as do content creators. This is getting to the point I'm trying to make, that the projec
by pknight 8y ago
The UI does interfere, you, as a theme developer, have to adjust to it, as do content creators. This is getting to the point I'm trying to make, that the project wasn't invoked to solve technical problems. It's not answering to technical problems but to the motivations of the project leader.
You bring up how Gutenberg solves some of the issues it creates, i.e. how theme developers supply editor styles to match what is seen in the front-end. Until recently Gutenberg didn't even prepend block specific selectors, it was even more broken than now. Why did it even start out that way? How is that even possible to have Gutenberg develop that far without properly thinking about how to style for it? Why is it this solution patched on? (same can be said for meta fields, accessibility and so forth). Because the project didn't start with a clear idea of the technical problems it wasn't going to have to solve, it wasn't a priority.
So, for theme developers Gutenberg is more labour intensive (though it can be rewarding). It wouldn't need to be more labour intensive had it started with the full breadth of priorities in mind at the very start. You say 'you don't need to worry about the soup of UI markup, but you do. You have to work around the quirks of the editor or constrain yourself. Say you want to target every 2nd heading, or the paragraph after a blockquote, you can't do that elegantly, because the markup is different in the editor as it is in the front-end and it's not solved by prepending block selectors. Gutenbergs editor styles solution isn't elegant either. It is not a complete disaster, but it's indicative of the fact that the project is imposing its own paradigm over the problems its trying to solve. It's literally creating new problems to solve.
> they are not without downsides too. In-browser editing is a compromise and balancing act.
I'm not convinced at all that a different approach to how the UI manifests itself in the DOM would have entailed any meaningful trade offs at all. I've been working with this prosemirror implementation recently and the basic example pretty much matches my demo posted earlier: https://tiptap.scrumpy.io/ https://tiptap.scrumpy.io/
- modernerd 8y ago+1 I can concede that there are likely better technical implementations than where Gutenberg is at now. (Ghost's Koenig editor with the open block/card model is great, if much simpler and cutting corners by lacking Edge browser support and the ability to add custom cards.) WordPress has always been a project where user happiness outweighs developer happiness, though, as much as I'd love for it to at least bring developer happiness inline. It will be interesting to see what the overall reaction is when 5.0 lands and the editor starts to become more widely used and accepted.
- pknight 8y agoYes and I'll concede that Gutenberg has a lot of room to grow and will even make plenty of people happy straight away. But I wouldn't call this about user happiness outweighing developer happiness, I'd say it's the other way around. It's based on asserting that we know what the future user wants, not the actual users. Right now user happiness is skewing negative. And Gutenberg's development is precisely characterised by developers/designers prioritising their own happiness. It's a small group of people working mostly at agencies and companies doing enterprise level work who took Matt's idea around blocks and feverishly adopted the tools they personally wanted to use while developing and making decisions at a pace more rapid than other contributors could cope with. That is in part why we lost the accessibility lead.
- photomatt 8y agoJust wanted to clarify one thing, that “we lost the accessibility lead.” There were no accessibility leads until one was designated for the 5.0 release. There were three self-appointed accessibility team reps, one of which decided to step back from the group and blog about it. “Team rep” is largely an administrative role, and as I said before it’s self-appointed. Some teams have 5+ reps, and historically they have not been approved by anyone in WordPress leadership, nor do they connote authority or skill.