Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 20 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Articles about Gutenberg #1419
Comments
samikeijonen
commented
Jun 24, 2017
•
|
Here is one from Amanda, she's a screen reader user: Gutenberg With A Screen Reader: Initial Thoughts And Reactions. Here are WPTavern Gutenberg related articles. |
samikeijonen
commented
Jun 24, 2017
|
@jasmussen Would it be a good idea to write an article that would answer (or at least try to answer) to most common questions what have been done and what will be done? These topics comes to my mind:
|
|
I think that makes total sense, and would be a great FAQ for people concerned with the ongoing work. Part of such an FAQ/article should be simply restating the kickoff goal which I've had to repeat a number of times already, as it quite well encapsulates the ultimate goal. From https://make.wordpress.org/core/2017/01/04/focus-tech-and-design-leads/:
Key take-aways from parsing that paragraph:
|
|
In #1434 I took a first stab at some design principles for Gutenberg. This doesn't directly solve the issue suggested here, but it has some of the answers. |
youknowriad
referenced this issue
Jun 27, 2017
Closed
Documentation: Initial matchers documentation #1499
|
Adding to the collection... :) First Reactions to Gutenberg |
samikeijonen
commented
Jun 28, 2017
|
Also First Reactions to Gutenberg, the Future of WordPress by Mark Root-Wiley. |
|
Lots of good articles. It feels like a large amount of the issues reported revolve around:
I understand every concern here. I've shared those concerns in some way or other for the past 6 months. And while I can proclaim again that these are important issues that are not being ignored, I suspect the only way to alleviate these concerns is to continue to address them. At some point, I am confident, these concerns will be addressed. But absent a time machine all we can do is march onwards, and keep building. My personal goal isn't to destroy accessibility, or to create an editor that people want to disable. This may sound obvious at the face of it, but in context of some of the concerns it seems worth actually stating outright. My goal is to build an editor that works for everyone, helps enable people to author richer posts with less effort, and is built on a foundation that the webdesigners growing up today are excited to build and improve upon, and contribute to. |
Agree 100% and that's why I'm trying to code something and make it better instead of just bla bla [Edited, oh dear my English...] |
|
mrwweb
commented
Jun 28, 2017
|
Might I suggest a FAQ become a major priority for this project? I think it really needs to be out by the time a 0.3.0 release comes out. Even as someone who has tried to follow this project closely, I feel in the dark on some pretty basic questions. @samikeijonen's list is excellent. Particular +1s go to meta boxes, conversion from the old editor, and theme styling. It's really awkward writing a review at this point (although I think is important to do) when I don't know what basic issues I can ignore because they're coming and which issues are terrifying and deserve alarm bells right now. The alarm bells are in hopes that things get caught now when they're addressable. Related to the above, I can't find the comment I saw before, but so many questions are about existing features of the current editor. Things like:
Has there been any comprehensive list made of current ways to customize the editor, common usages, and mapped equivalents to Gutenberg (along with issue #s?)? This would be relieve a lot of developer worries and make sure the project doesn't overlook common types of customizations the editor needs to support.
As Adrian Roselli's article gets at, I rely on the current editor as a key tool for my client websites. Being able to support them on it in the future is a big concern. If I can't easily rebuild existing features, I'm going to have a lot of really unhappy clients. I feel like I owe them as much of a heads up as possible about coming costs (many need to budget up to a year ahead for major work), but the lack of basic feature parity questions has made me hesitant to say anything yet.
Totally believe that. In fact, I'm sure you want to make an editor that's accessible. I think my primary concern was simply that it feels like a lot of work has been done already and accessibility retrofitting is never as good as accessibility from the start. I may be misreading things—that's absolutely the danger of weighing in on a project at this phase and I'm trying to be careful—but I hope that at least clarifies the thinking. |
|
From the TinyMCE team's perspective I'd like to see any FAQ address it's role in Gutenberg and WordPress in general going forward. To the extent that is known right now, of course. |
jasmussen
added
Documentation
[Type] Question
labels
Jun 29, 2017
mrwweb
commented
Jun 30, 2017
|
Has some good high-level thoughts: https://briancoords.com/blog/gutenberg-the-obligatory-review/ |
jasmussen
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 5, 2017
|
|
jasmussen |
881709c
|
mtias
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 5, 2017
|
|
jasmussen + mtias |
ccd05e9
|
aardrian
commented
Jul 8, 2017
|
“Accessibility testing WordPress Gutenberg – a first look” |
|
Gutenberg Editor Review: Please Don’t Include This in WordPress Core |
paaljoachim
commented
Jul 10, 2017
•
|
"Why Gutenberg? Because Everyone Loves Page Builders" |
paaljoachim
commented
Jul 15, 2017
•
|
"Introducing Gutenberg Boilerplate For Third Party Custom Blocks!" |
|
“Gutenberg, Shortcodes, Shortcake, and Metaboxes” |
|
"Thoughts on Gutenberg" :) |
|
"Do We Really Even Need Gutenberg?" |
paaljoachim
commented
Aug 12, 2017
|
"Gutenberg and the future of Meta Box" |
bph
commented
Aug 12, 2017
|
Right after WordCamp Europe, I started this Storify collecting Resources, links and blog posts. |
paaljoachim commentedJun 24, 2017
•
edited
I came across a mention of Gutenberg at the Advanced WordPress Facebook group and wanted to find a good way of sharing it. So I decided on creating this issue in regards to articles we came across that would be good to collect and study closer. As there are a lot of feedback from various people.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/advancedwp/permalink/1539270842801791/
(I found the below articles mentioned in the above link.)
https://www.mattcromwell.com/gutenberg-first-impressions/
http://www.wp-munich.com/first-look-gutenberg-wordpress/
http://chrislema.com/misunderstanding-goal-gutenberg-writing-experience/
https://www.wpwatercooler.com/video/ep238-future-wordpress-gutenberg/
Updated with links mentioned below and found elsewhere:
http://adrianroselli.com/2017/06/first-reactions-to-gutenberg.html
https://daily.jorb.in/2017/06/random-thoughts-on-gutenberg/
https://kinsta.com/blog/gutenberg-wordpress-editor/
https://wplift.com/gutenberg-editor-first-look
http://gschoppe.com/wordpress/improving-wordpress/improving-wordpress-pt-4-where-project-gutenberg-lost-me-open-letter-to-core/
https://mrwweb.com/first-reactions-gutenberg-future-of-wordpress/
https://www.customerservant.com/gutenberg-screen-reader-initial-thoughts-reactions/
https://wptavern.com/tag/gutenberg
https://joost.blog/gutenberg-and-yoast-seo/
http://wordimpress.com/gutenberg-mean-plugin-authors/
https://briancoords.com/blog/gutenberg-the-obligatory-review/
https://halfelf.org/2017/post-written-gutenberg/
Gutenberg and why WordPress may have a marketing problem
26 June, 2017 - by MHThemes
Project Gutenberg: Medium like editing experience coming to WordPress
27 June, 2017
First Reactions to Gutenberg
June 27, 2017 - By Adrian Roselli
First Reactions to Gutenberg, the Future of WordPress
June 27, 2017 - By Mark Root-Wiley
Questions & concerns from my first impression of the WordPress Gutenberg editor
29 June, 2017 - by Josh Pollock
Gutenberg: The Obligatory Review
June 29, 2017 - By Brian Coords
What Does Gutenberg Mean for Plugin Authors?
June 30, 2017 - By Matt Cromwell
This Post Was Written on Gutenberg
30 JUNE, 2017 - By Mika Epstein
Gutenberg Contributors Explore Adding Drag-and-Drop and Multi-Column Support for Blocks
1 July, 2017 - by Sarah Gooding
WordPress Gutenberg Design Facelift
3 July, 2017 - by Titanas
Cloudways Tests Gutenberg — The Future WordPress Native Editor
5 July, 2017 - by Saud Razzak
"Why Gutenberg? Because Everyone Loves Page Builders"
July 5, 2017 By Steve Burge
https://www.ostraining.com/blog/news/pagebuilders/
Gutenberg Editor Review: Please Don’t Include This in WordPress Core
July 6, 2017 By Brenda Barron
https://premium.wpmudev.org/blog/gutenberg-editor-wordpress/
“Accessibility testing WordPress Gutenberg – a first look”
July 7, 2017 By Claire Brotherton
https://www.abrightclearweb.com/accessibility-testing-wordpress-gutenberg-first-look/
"Introducing Gutenberg Boilerplate For Third Party Custom Blocks!"
July 15, 2017 By Ahmad Awais
https://ahmadawais.com/gutenberg-boilerplate/
"Do We Really Even Need Gutenberg?"
Jul 26, 2017 by Richard Ginn
https://sunflowerchildthemes.com/really-even-need-gutenberg/
"Gutenberg and the future of Meta Box"
10 August, 2017 by Anh Tranon.
https://metabox.io/gutenberg-and-meta-box/
This is a site that mentions various Gutenberg news:
WordPress Gutenberg Editor - Resources & Posts
https://storify.com/bph/wordpress-gutenberg-early-comments