what understood "fluid powered typo3" (as stated http://fedext.net/) , benefits integration?
are there other modern templating approaches typo3 6.x best practice switch now?
i don't understand different systems around @ moment , need clarification.
the background of question, looking for:
- don't use templavoila
- keep simple, little coding overhead
- that's why still use markers!
- enable custom content items in backend fces in tv
- foment "structured content" approach in typo3: predefined inputs , detailed rendering vs. "anything goes" in css_styled_content
and https://github.com/ecodev/bootstrap_package ? recommendable?
fluid offers cleaner approach of dividing template logic display logic , controller logic. result structured better when using possibilities fluid , mentioned extensions vhs provide (like layouts , partials).
the usage simple can still combined oldschool marker approach (you can things <f:cobject typoscriptobjectpath="lib.marks.main-menu"/>). if need more flexibility in backend in tv, (of course) have code things yourself.
the easiest way use extension created modelling in backend fit custom needs, can adjust rendering of pages and/or default content elements using typoscript , fields given (like pages.layout, header_layout, section_frame , on).
so have choice between detailed inputs (extbase extension objects) , using typo3 default things page properties , rte config in combination typoscript magic (css_styled_content).
so conclusion i recommend using fluid templates , additional extensions vhs provide lot of (additional) power , reusable templates while still let use markers if want to. personally, prefer enhance or limit rte in backend in favor of writing special code fce-like result.
btw: there autocomplete features using dtds/xsds fedext.net in ide made template programming faster (like 25%).
Comments
Post a Comment