Sitekit Forums

Sitekit Forums

General Discussion - Sitekit CMS - I've an idea for a new feature...

Sitekit

AdminSitekit

Posted on 03 July 2014

We regularly review our development road map to incorporate features suggested by our clients.

If you have an idea or think we could improve the CMS in some way you can let us know in a reply to this discussion. We can't promise every request will make it into the CMS but we will consider each one on its own merit.

Andy Hadley

Andy Hadley

Posted on 14 July 2014

In the same way as the tiny editor, it would be good if rather than bb code, discussion forums included buttons for non techies to mark code as bold/underlined or insert images and links.

Appreciate that it is another step forwards.

James Delaney

AdminJames Delaney

Posted on 15 July 2014

Hi Andy, it's a great idea and certainly something we are considering for a possible future release.

Sites running on Sitekit CMS use a number of different javascript frameworks (e.g. JQuery, MooTools etc.) as well as different versions of those frameworks. The way we implement any CMS features that rely on script in the front-end must be able to work with these and require as little effort by site administrators as possible when they choose to enable a feature that uses a tool such as the TinyMCE rich text editor.

BB Code is an established forum syntax and is requires no additional front-end scripting on a site. Individual sites can make use of tools like TinyMCE right now if they wish, for these forums we have tried to stay relatively close to the default functionality and feature set with some extension. It's worth mentioning that Sitekit CMS managed forms (Configure > Forms) do not currently allow raw HTML (as would be generated by Tiny) within input and textarea fields to be submitted.

Andy Hadley

Andy Hadley

Posted on 25 July 2014

Attaching files - when you attach, you can't change the title without going back into edit. Would be good to be able to do this in the dialogue as you add the file.

On properties, it seems that the Search field is being populated with the text for a PDF - which is great, but not for a .docx.

Which file formats are deep file searchable, and will .doc and .docx be added soon ?

Andy Hadley

Andy Hadley

Posted on 31 July 2014

A-Z - the automated A-Z is good for pages and files - can it be extended to links please ?

Andy Hadley

Andy Hadley

Posted on 31 July 2014

A-Z - the automated A-Z is good for pages and files - can it be extended to links please ?

James Delaney

AdminJames Delaney

Posted on 31 July 2014

Attaching files - when you attach, you can't change the title without going back into edit. Would be good to be able to do this in the dialogue as you add the file.

The file rename is a great suggestion but I see that being something where the rename becomes part of the upload process where you have the opportunity to define a Link Title and File Summary. What do you think?

A-Z - the automated A-Z is good for pages and files - can it be extended to links please ?

Our Links library does have some limirations but you can implement your own bespoke Links library by creating a Post type called Link with a URL and contact custom fields. The benefit of this method is that any added Link posts could also be related to category/tag or other post-types allowing an A-Z or a filtered list, or some other bespoke display.

There is one thing it would not allow and that is for Post-based Links to be selected on a page as related links. To get around that you could add a data island that displayed links matching a specific tag. A tag could potentially be entered using our new TEXT(x) type to allow it to be entered in the front end by an editor. If no links with that specific tag are found nothing is displayed.

James Delaney

AdminJames Delaney

Posted on 31 July 2014

Thinking about the Links A-Z further Andy, using Posts also provides the opportunity to apply different permissions classes to different Links if you have some that you do not necessarily want everyone to see. You could use this to display additional links only to managers for example, or only to logged in users.

James Bentley

Posted on 14 August 2014

Unless I've gone completely barmy, there doesn't appear to be a spell checker in the text editor - and there hasn't been for a while. Any plans to add one? It'd be mighty useful.

James Bentley

Posted on 14 August 2014

I'm going through my list of suggested features - you may get sick of me very shortly. I'd like to be able to delete images (and other assets) in batches. If you can already do this I'd be happy to be shifted to another thread. If not - good idea?

James Bentley

Posted on 14 August 2014

Some of the Sitekit guys are already aware of my attempts to request this, but would anyone else find a preview feature useful?

By this I mean the ability to have what would effectively be a staging site whereby you could either publish to a testing server or save something and be able to view a full test site, navigation and all, via a separate URL.

I realise previous attempts to explain this have not been completely successful so happy to expand.

James Bentley

Posted on 14 August 2014

Another text editor idea - pasting without formatting. Would be useful to remove the formatting from pasted text when copying from other web pages etc.

James Delaney

AdminJames Delaney

Posted on 20 August 2014

We'll never get sick of you James. Suggestions are always welcomed and help us ensure we develop the product in a way that is actually useful to our clients!

I'll take your queries one at a time:

Unless I've gone completely barmy, there doesn't appear to be a spell checker in the text editor - and there hasn't been for a while. Any plans to add one? It'd be mighty useful.

Some operating systems use a built-in spell-checker that operates in all apps and wherever text can be entered. Windows unfortunately isn't one of these though third-party tools that provide that level of, always-on, spell-checking do fill that gap.

At the browser level, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome and Opera all include built-in spell-checking too. Given a large portion of our user-base use Internet Explorer we have implemented a third-party spellchecker in Sitekit CMS 10.1 to fill the gap in Internet Explorer. This spellchecker also overrides the default browser and operating system spellcheckers and includes the option for users to add their own words to a personal library.

It's worth noting the spell-checker only works in rich-text editing. Plain textarea fields within the CMS rely on browser or operating system support.

I'd like to be able to delete images (and other assets) in batches. If you can already do this I'd be happy to be shifted to another thread. If not - good idea?

Yes, it's a good idea, but not something you can currently do within the CMS.

would anyone else find a preview feature useful

By this I mean the ability to have what would effectively be a staging site whereby you could either publish to a testing server or save something and be able to view a full test site, navigation and all, via a separate URL.

We do provide a preview feature within the CMS for content editors and managers but, if I understand you, your preference would effectively be a second version of your site where you can create content or experiment? Then when you're happy with something then you can push it to the live site. If I have it right this is not something currently available within the hosted CMS. If your license allows it you could set up a second site with restricted access or an alternate URL and it could be set-up with copies of your templates/pages etc. Our installations deployed on to your own equipment might also replicate part of this as you could have two separate installations set-up. You wouldn't however be able to publish a change on one site and have it replicated or reflected on the other at this point in time.

This point would be one for discussion with your Account Manager.

Another text editor idea - pasting without formatting. Would be useful to remove the formatting from pasted text when copying from other web pages etc.

That's been in there for sometime. Certainly in Sitekit CMS 9.5 it was extended to those users with the standard toolbar too. In the latest version of the rich-text editor it looks like this:

It will strip out span tags and other formatting whilst leaving structural elements (DIV, H1, P, OL/UL etc.) in place.

I hope those responses help. Is there anything else that you would find useful or would make it working with Sitekit CMS easier?

James Bentley

Posted on 21 August 2014

Thanks James - very comprehensive.

Spell check - I've just this morning noticed the red underlining for the first time, so right-clicked and had a look round. Much better.

I'd like to be able to delete images (and other assets) in batches. If you can already do this I'd be happy to be shifted to another thread. If not - good idea?
Yes, it's a good idea, but not something you can currently do within the CMS.

Is this likely to be considered for a release at some point?

We do provide a preview feature within the CMS for content editors and managers but, if I understand you, your preference would effectively be a second version of your site where you can create content or experiment?

Yes, that's right. I have discussed this with Ian Waters and Ian Stewart - I posted it on here largely to see if any other users had any thoughts. I suspect we're not the only ones who would find this useful.

... It will strip out span tags and other formatting whilst leaving structural elements (DIV, H1, P, OL/UL etc.) in place.

Thanks - I know about this, but was specifically referring to stripping out formatting while pasting, rather than having to paste then remove formatting afterwards. I have seen this done elsewhere - just thought it would be a nice little feature. It's all about saving those milliseconds!

I have some more items on my list, and we do add more from time to time. I'll post more as they come up/when I get chance.

James Bentley

Posted on 21 August 2014

To clarify my last point, I think the word "formatting" might be misleading. I suppose I mean "paste as plain text".

Andy Hadley

Andy Hadley

Posted on 26 August 2014

To respond to James' suggestion, "your preference would effectively be a second version of your site where you can create content or experiment?".

I guess our experience, having a multi-instance setup is that shifting content from one place to another was difficult (we had to pay Sitekit to move it as we teased two organisations apart). Our internal and www content sit in separate Sitekit Instances, and this separation is good in ensuring search engines etc don't leach, but a right pain if people decide they put content on the wrong side of the fence.

We do have multiple websites, including a training/testing area within individual Sitekit instances, and the ability to mark pages as in/out of navigation, and to quickly update as you are developing mean that we're not desperate for another distinct area- it takes time to keep things synchronised.

To get 'authorisation' on an area in development just means having a subtree that is not publicised or navigable from the main site.

So don't really share the need.

James Bentley

Posted on 28 August 2014

You could have a simple two-stage publishing process though, or rather two options for publishing - publish to testing site and publish to live site.

We can't be the only organisation which has requests to see content before it goes live - surely the ability to view content "as live", but not actually available publicly, so it can be checked before go-live would be beneficial in multiple situations and to many organisations? We find it really difficult to say to people: "You can check your content, but please note that when it actually goes live it will navigate completely differently." The best example of when this might be required is when one of our hospital's specialties wants a new section on the website - so more than just one page - and asks to be able to effectively proof it before it goes live.

Not saying everyone needs it - just hard to believe we're alone in this.

James Delaney

AdminJames Delaney

Posted on 01 September 2014

Hi James,

Workflow improvements are part of our scheduled roadmap. There are no more details of them yet; we're also looking at scheduling page changes, not just initial visibility.

The way a (not yet live) page is navigated to will always be tricky where you only have one site and maintaining two brings its own technical considerations though I can see what you're aiming for. In the meantime an option that might work for your example would be to use a different asset class on their branch/section. That asset class could be visibile for staff within the N3 but hidden from public view (it can return a 404 or prompt for a username/password on load).

When they are happy with the page, change the asset class for those pages/the branch back to the default to make the pages available to all.

It's not quite what you're after but may offer a workaround in some cases. I am happy to elaborate on how you might implement this if you would like help trying it/setting it up?

Ricky

Posted on 05 March 2015

This is impressive :)