UX Experiment - "Simple" mode for content editing #64866
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Size Change: +722 B (+0.04%) Total Size: 1.78 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
getdave
commented
Aug 28, 2024
| blocksWithinMainBlockClientIds: | ||
| getBlockOrder( mainBlockClientId ), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We could use this technique as well.
richtabor
reviewed
Aug 28, 2024
|
Nice exploration! 👍 Just pinging @noisysocks for visibility as he's also been experimenting in this area (#64628). |
|
Thanks for putting this together! This is working as expected in the site and post editor, bar one exception. On the post editor when I select the container of the section, I can insert blocks inside, is that intended? 
|
I guess not. Good spot though. Generally, this PR is acting as a quick experiment. If folks think it has promise then I'll be happy to refine it a little bit. |
|
Good stuff, thanks @getdave. I think treating it as a new editor mode makes sense. I plan on tinkering more in this area next week. |
getdave
force-pushed
the
try/editor-wide-content-lock
branch
2 times, most recently
from
0fc6da3
to
730a31e
Compare
getdave
changed the title
Next StepsI spoke a bit away from Github with @richtabor and @jeryj and we reviewed how this is feeling and what needs to change to make it easier for folks to try out this experiment. Here are what we believe should be the next steps here:
@noisysocks it would be great if we could all collab on this. We agree that at this stage the aim should be to iterate at low fidelity. It's acceptable to hack things in for purposes of getting to a proof of concept that folks can easily try out and get a feel for. |
22 tasks
Just need to be careful around patterns and parts of the site editing experience that already leverage content only (though I think mostly Maybe it's a chance to try a more granular API (though I realize you might want this to be a quicker experiment 😄 ). |
getdave
force-pushed
the
try/editor-wide-content-lock
branch
from
98adc4b
to
696c89b
Compare
I think ultimately we'll need more flexibility yes.
Yes that's right. We're trying to move quickly and experiment. Then once we know more what we're aiming for we can consider the best implementation 🤞 This PR is open to anyone 🙇 |
|
@talldan I'm trying to get the editorMode to save to preference called |
|
I'm closing this in favour of working on #65027. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What?
Tries creating a
Simplemode for the Editor.Why?
This is just an experiment to see how it feels if we make all the blocks within the top level sections content only. This makes the editor feel a lot more simple.
How?
To make this easy to test, i've shoehorned in a
Simplemode into the mode selector at the top of the editor. This is only for testing purposes!Testing Instructions
Testing Instructions for Keyboard
Screenshots or screencast
Screen.Capture.on.2024-08-28.at.12-24-12.mp4