[wp-hackers] Re: New Posting Screen

Matthew Mullenweg m at mullenweg.com
Thu Jun 23 16:40:14 GMT 2005

Scott Merrill wrote:
> I haven't used 1.6 ALPHA yet, so my feedback is all second hand.  My 
> understanding is that 1.6's post interface provides collapsable and 
> movable panels on the post screen.  I was told that the initial load 
> time for the post screen is unpleasantly long.

Please use it before commenting? In my mind there is a strong separation 
between concept and implementation. The concept is something to be 
debated. The current implementation ("unpleasantly long" load times) is 
something that can be improved with time and iteration. (Much like the 
original code for Kubrick was nearly unusable, but got much much better 
with iteration even though the general concept stayed the same.) If 
something *can't* be improved or iterated on, then it is worth 
discussing the validity of the concept itself.

> What _value_ is provided by collapsable / movable panels in the post 
> screen?  In what way does this make WordPress a better blogging product? 
>  Does it speed up the posting process for the majority of users, without 
> a negative result for the minority of users?

It gives a unified posting interface, instead of an interface that 
switches around semi-randomly based on your options and whether you are 
editing are not. It hides complexity from new users while allowing 
advanced users 95% customizability to get their most common tasks done.

> A good friend of mine migrated from MovabteType to WordPress 
> _specifically_ for the admin interface.  He uses a crappy dial-up 
> connection, and was thrilled with the responsiveness of WP's image-free 
> admin interface.  Will he be able to keep his enthusaism?


> I asked if there was any way to "turn off" the fancy new post screen, 
> and was told "nope".  Please consider this my contribution to the 
> discussion: make any fancy post screen an optional, non-default, thing. 
>  People who want it can turn it on.  People who don't want it need never 
> deal with it.

You've advocated things like this before, and to reiterate, *adding 
options is not a good resolution to an argument*. I would rather have 
the developers like you who dislike aspects about the proposed interface 
be annoyed into making it better rather than relegating it into an 
another useless option to confuse new users.

A good test for a new option is: Would you make this a required question 
in the installation? Now picture someone brand new to WordPress -- 
"Would you like the simple or advanced posting screen?"

> Folks in the support forum aren't having problems with their posting 
> screens (or if they are, I haven't seen it).  Sure, the post screen 
> could use some adjusting, to minimize the amount of clutter, but 
> development effort toward features that people struggle with seems 
> better than adding new gloss.

There is a constant drive for usability and interface enhancements to 
WP, and that will never change. Anything that makes things simpler for 
new users and more powerful for power users is a win in my book.

> I learned last night that someone had been tasked with revamping the 
> image handling in 1.6.  That was the first I'd heard about it.  _THAT_ 
> is something that will substantially benefit a lot more users than a 
> fancy dynamic post interface.  An improved image upload and insertion 
> process is, by itself, enough to motivate a lot of people to upgrade.
> But that code hasn't been checked in yet, so no one gets to discuss it.

Before you get excited here, I haven't seen the code either! Someone 
poke Owen. ;) I "delegated" that part of 1.6 to Owen because he had 
already written a really excellent plugin for WP for media handling and 
he was also able to grok the media model for WP. (The post/sub-post 
thing that was discussed on this list ages ago but lost now because it 
wasn't archived in a wiki or blog.) This is also part of me letting go 
of aspects of development to third parties. As soon as I know more about 
the code or get a peek at it, I'll let people know.

> If I want to "discuss" some major overhaul of WordPress, it's a little 
> harder for me to get everyone to download and test it, regardless of the 
> possible merits of my suggestion.

See and touch doesn't need to be core code, it can be graphic or HTML 
mockups, or even just ASCII drawings like the other Matt used to do. In 
theory plugins could do this as well, but your point is taken.

> I first started becoming concerned about development openness when the 
> security vulnerability was announced, and went up.  I asked if 
> there was a security team.  You said "Yes".
> _WHO?_

The people you see linked when you install WP, currently Dougal, Mike, 
Alex, Michel, Carthik, Ryan, and myself. It's not meant to be 
exclusionary, it's just people who have been around for a really long 
time, have great chops, and who I trust to address things appropriately.

> How can we officially direct others to this team, when claims of a new 
> vulnerability arise?  If you're travelling, with 30 minutes of net 
> access per day, who is responsible for responding to security issues?


security at wordpress.org

Matt Mullenweg
  http://photomatt.net | http://wordpress.org
http://pingomatic.com | http://cnet.com

More information about the wp-hackers mailing list