Ask Questions and Find Answers
Important:
Ask is now read-only. You can review any existing questions and answers, but not add anything new.
But - don't panic! While ask is no more, we've replaced it with discuss - the new Liferay Discussion Forum! Read more here here or just visit the site here:
discuss.liferay.com
RE: 7.2 B2 - Web Content Entry - Title Easily Missed, Content Box Expand
Web Content Title doesn't look like it is editable as part of the form. Should be put back above the content field and the content field still looks like it can only take a limited number of characters (looks like a text field rather than a "textarea").
Attachments:
Hey Lee,
This has been a concious decission since the "title" field is special and separate from all other fields which are defined by the structure. In fact, we have detected a significant number of real world structures that have a second title in the structure itself since they use the one that comes out of the box just for giving a name to the web content article that is meaningful for content admins only (and not displayed to end users). In those cases, having the special title field along with others kept creating confusion.
We are aware that there is some risk in putting the title out of the form, but after evaluating it we believe it is small. Having the title there is a increasingly common pattern across web applications and one that we are applying in more places within Liferay, so even in the case a user may miss it initially, we believe it's a pattern that will be learned quite easily.
I hope that makes sense.
Jorge
This has been a concious decission since the "title" field is special and separate from all other fields which are defined by the structure. In fact, we have detected a significant number of real world structures that have a second title in the structure itself since they use the one that comes out of the box just for giving a name to the web content article that is meaningful for content admins only (and not displayed to end users). In those cases, having the special title field along with others kept creating confusion.
We are aware that there is some risk in putting the title out of the form, but after evaluating it we believe it is small. Having the title there is a increasingly common pattern across web applications and one that we are applying in more places within Liferay, so even in the case a user may miss it initially, we believe it's a pattern that will be learned quite easily.
I hope that makes sense.
Jorge
Yeah, we have "second titles" too. I know of at least three installations of Liferay with an extra title field. Most often the developers had no clue how to read the title field in freemarker and simply added a structure field ...
"${.vars['reserved-article-title'].data}" is not obvious.
In general: I dislike forms, where you don't see what is editable and what isn't. But it is modern currently, so be it.
"${.vars['reserved-article-title'].data}" is not obvious.
In general: I dislike forms, where you don't see what is editable and what isn't. But it is modern currently, so be it.
How does this now work when searching for web content? A tonne of "Untitled Basic Web Content" is what I'm envisioning. And does that change to the other template names so "Untitled Global - Slider".
I think because it's so obscure now and doesn't look like a form entry field at all, it should be required again. Maybe even calling it "Friendly Name" would have helped clear up the dupe labels "Title" "Title". It really doesn't look like a form field, wouldn't moving it into the sidebar have been a better place?
I think because it's so obscure now and doesn't look like a form entry field at all, it should be required again. Maybe even calling it "Friendly Name" would have helped clear up the dupe labels "Title" "Title". It really doesn't look like a form field, wouldn't moving it into the sidebar have been a better place?
Copyright © 2025 Liferay, Inc
• Privacy Policy
Powered by Liferay™