New Layout Builder with Header and Footer inside

Beta
#1

When trying out the new layout builder I have to say that the mixture of header, footer and content is not a nice solution for me.

It is still quite clear if you only have a header, footer and then maybe a layout for all pages and one for archives. But on my larger pages that quickly becomes confusing when the headers and footers are lost in the other layouts. There is also visually no distinction, everything looks the same. The only possibility to filter something is via the search function, which can be annoying in the long run.

I ask you to reconsider this. Header and Footer are special layouts and should be easy to find. If everything should be found under the layout builder, then you could also display the different areas differently, such as separated in columns. (Header, Footer, Pages, Archives).
That would already contribute a lot to the handling help.

I could imagine something like this:

LayoutBuilkderSuggestion
LayoutBuilkderSuggestion870Ă—400 10.4 KB

5 Likes
#2

I can confirm the confusion while working with multiple layouts, footers, headers in one list. If the list is so long that you have to scroll, it’s no fun …

What about having 4 filter-icons for header, footer, single, archive on top of the list?

So the layout of the list stays the same, but it’s one click to only show all headers etc.?

And if there is an icon for header, footer etc., this could also be added to each item in the list, so even if not using the filter, you can see at first sight, what is what.

Best regards

Uli

2 Likes
#3

Thanks @Regnalf and @ULinn for sharing your feedback here. We received similar comments about it not being as easy to find existing layouts. We do want the default view to show everything, but we are considering adding some filters.

1 Like
#4

I’m also for keeping them separate. I’m not sure filters will cut it. While I get that we don’t often have multiple headers and footers most of us have multiple other layouts.

Maybe just move headers and footers into their own category. So a single section for both.

#5

Agree, filters are a drawback. I would be at least better if it is like before in separate areas.

#6

I understand. I think we’ll add the filters here, but beyond that it’s an unfortunate adjustment some of us will need to make. Moving forward, we actually want them all to feel part like of the Layout Builder. Allow me to recap on some additional considerations behind this decision.

  • Headers, Footers, Single, and Archive Layouts all share the same trait of being something that you can assign to various site contexts by adding rules.

  • Sections can now be used when editing Headers and Footers. They’re also the default in the Footers builder. This helps the different building contexts be more unified and removes restrictions on what’s possible.

  • “Headers” and “Footers” as site design elements (not speaking about the builders here) can be achieved in many different ways

    • It’s entirely possible to design a “header” or “footer” (speaking of the design elements, not the builder mechanic) directly while creating a single or archive layout. On more simple sites, it may just be easier to bake those parts right into one big master layout.
    • Another technique would be making multiple footer like sections in the component builder, use those in a single layout, then use element conditions to hide/show them conditionally.

  • For new users just learning the tool, we help reinforce that each builder has a distinct purpose, and offers similar mechanics

    • Page Builder lets you add actual content to the site
    • Layout Builder lets you design the site chrome displayed around your content.
    • Component Builder lets you construct reusable elements.

  • Knowing there are only three builders is less initial mental overhead when getting started.

    • The learning curve goes up with each builder like: Beginner (Page), Intermediate (Layout), Advanced (Components)

Most of us here are veteran users of Cornerstone and Pro who have been using it for years. With each new feature, builder, you name it, there’s been an opportunity to learn that new thing incrementally. For new users it hits all at once with every single button and option. We have to deal with the challenge of organizing all the richness and complexity of Cornerstone. We’re looking for opportunities to reduce the initial exploration possibilities, and help guide people towards things that are easiest to learn first. “Headers” is a very tempting place to just jump right in, but it’s actually the most nuanced builder that has the least in common with the others.

We’re incredibly grateful for your dedication to our products, and for all the time you spend testing and sharing your thoughts with us. I do hate that sometimes changes like this introduce more friction for existing workflows. Hopefully adding some filters here will alleviate most of it.

1 Like
#7

@alexander I don’t have a lot of knowledge of how things are working here or what the difficulties are here in organising things as people are requesting but, would it be possible otherwise to work with different colors or an icon for example. Like setting it up as a condition. Don’t know if it makes sense what I’m saying or if it is clear what I mean.

#8

I’ll add some classes like is-layout-header to the index items so under “Edit UI CSS” in the Dev Toolkit you can add something like this for color, or other CSS if you want to work in some icons with pseudo elements.

.tco-index-entry.is-layout-header {
  color: #ff0;
}
4 Likes