[RFE] Viewless content types

[tobias2k]

Proposal: add a property viewless to contenttypes.yml (or, alternatively, allow explicitly setting the template properties to null - discuss!), which indicates that:

• the contenttype is not associated with any template
• the contenttype does not produce any frontend routes
• there is no 'Preview' button in the backend for this contenttype
• the contenttype does not appear in any search results or listings on the frontend

The purpose of such contenttypes is to provide manageable "auxiliary" content that can be referenced from other content records and templates (either through getContent / {% setcontent %}, or by means of Relationships), but doesn't make sense on its own. Popular examples include snippets of information that you may want to share between proper content records, but that don't deserve frontend pages of their own, such as contact addresses, content blocks for headers and footers, etc.

Technically, all that is required to do this is add the property, and check it in a few strategic places to block the things listed above.

Regarding naming, I propose the term viewless contenttypes; suggestions for a better name are extremely welcome.

[GwendolenLynch]

This has been on my wish list forever. I currently have hackish workarounds for it, but something simple and formal would be awesome!

[rixbeck]

+1 and other +1 for template:=null

[rossriley]

I actually like the simplicity of setting the template to null but then I guess that can be a bit magic in that it does much more than just not have a template.

So my vote would be for an explicit setting (although by convention it might be nice to set the template to null too) not sure the best name for it, viewless and viewable seem a bit awkward.

[xiaohutai]

Same as @GawainLynch . I usually call them Blocks, then use {% setcontent block = 'blocks/some-item' %}. Something like, https://snippets.bolt.cm/s/5vkxt

[tobias2k]

@rossriley that was pretty much exactly my line of thought - template = null is elegant but magical, viewless = true is obvious but redundant.

[bobdenotter]

👍 for viewless: true, but i could live with template: null too.

[rixbeck]

... and what happens if dummy user conf like this?

...
    template: list.twig
.. bla-bla ...
    viewless: true
...

Just because a contenttype record can be long enough and could be long distance between that rows to be able realize easily what's the problem with.

[GwendolenLynch]

I would expect viewless: true to take precedence myself... 😕

[rarila]

👍

[rixbeck]

@GawainLynch it is of course. I was just meant about "Why my template doesn't gets run?" situations.

[GwendolenLynch]

"Why my template doesn't gets run?" situations.

Thinking out loud, but there is an updated logging system that will hit the ground circa 2.1 and one thing I want to do it look at what we're logging and how that is relayed to the site admins... Maybe this is just something we can log?

[rixbeck]

@GawainLynch that's fine I think. Entry in log something like this Viewless config option takes precedence over template... ?

[GwendolenLynch]

Works for me

[tobias2k]

I was just meant about "Why my template doesn't gets run?" situations.

Well, that question would rather surface as "why does my content not show up at all?"

In that context, maybe it would be somewhat confusing to see the route disappear when you set the template to null, so maybe we should go with the explicit "viewless property" solution after all.

[bobdenotter]

Ok, we will make it viewless: true

[GwendolenLynch]

🍻