Replacement for ADDT Includes

This is my main tool for development.

I want to drift away from using ADDT but need a good replacement for this killer app from Interakt!

What exactly does ADDT Includes do? I'm not familiar with that tool and Includes are handled relatively well by DW. What do you use it for? What does the interface look like?

Hallo Ray

Interakt, who developed the product initially, have a very good documentation about all the features of "ADDT includes" (formerly Interakt MX Includes):

mx_kollection.htm

Interakt (ADDT) had three different server behaviors for Server-Side Includes:

1. Regular "Server-Side Include", defines one file to be included. I usually use this for headers or footers: 049a10_serversideinclude.htm

2. "Server-Side Include from List", the most important feature (for me):
049a30_ssifromlist.htm

3. "Server-Side Include from table":

049a20_ssifromtable.htm

Please check the "New Features" area --> "MX Includes features". There you can also check the features of "NeXTensio", which was mentioned recently in other threads, asking for reorderable lists:

045320_nxtlistbrowserbehavior.htm
045310_nextensio_list_wz.htm#step4

I agree with this request. The original product name was "MX Includes". I hope to see it soon here it WA.

Im loving WebAssist Products and this forum rocks !

1) This is very simple... basically it gives you an interface to write:
<?php
require_once([filename]);
?>

so that you can browse to the filename and don't have to type in the file name manually, and don't need to write the one line of code. You could build this one yourself with the server behavior builder in about a minute.

2 and 3 are basically using the concept of designing a page as a template and alternating content through an include file that is controlled by url parameters passed to the page.

This too almost seems to simple to be considered a killer app. We could definitely recreate this functionality very quickly... The problem with 2 and 3 is that server side functionality often has to be included above the page to be effective. Anything that includes session_start() or header() manipulation including redirects would error if included in the middle of the page in the form of an include.

It seems like a structurally and functionality limiting approach to creating a site in general... and then you need to contend with the search engine friendly url issue, which I guess is easy enough with a mod-rewrite, but almost seems like an over-complication.

Wouldn't it make more sense to use a DW template, assign all of the content in the template to individual include files and then base individual pages off that template? It is basically the reverse of the above technique, where the MX includes concept has a static page and the content is controlled by includes, it would use includes for the page structure and control content on the individual pages.

This seems to me to be the more functionally and architecturally sound technique that shares the advantages and eliminates the disadvantages... anyone want to correct me here? I might be missing something.

The bottom line is that recreating this extension would be relatively easy. My problem with it is that I don't think it encourages a fundamentally sound site and page structure, and I don't like leading people down the wrong path... either way you are creating a new page for each content set. Either way you can change your entire design by editing a single page.

Nextensio is a data grid. We are investigating this as a potential addition to our toolset, and it is very likely to be produced sometime next year.

Hi Ray

I've set up a quick demo to show how the includes work:

ray/

I don't think, that this could be compared to Dreamweaver templates. Believe me, this is so much more flexible, once you get used to working with ADDT-includes.

The complete site svtaufkirchen.de is based on this technique. I'm just creating the pure nuggets and include them.

Hope, this gets somehow clearer ;-)

Greetings

Willi

I see how it would work with simple content, such as your example.

My problem is with the flexability when using forms, file downloads, shopping carts, email, or other complex functionality, which this structure won't support.

I'll do some thinking on this one and see if it makes sense for us to create the includes functionality for users such as yourself.

I wouldn't mind setting up a phone call with you to show you how you could organize your site the way I suggest and demonstrate the advantages if you are up for it. If you are still sold on this technique while fully understanding the option I propose it would better convince me of the viability of the extension.

Send me an email to ray@webassist.com with your phone number and I'll give you a call and discuss this further with you.

Hi Ray

Thanks for your reply.
"Server-side-includes" definitly works with forms, file downloads, sending mail etc..
I'll send you a link in PM

Greetings

Willi

OK... I can see that it works in that case.

Do you apply your server behaviors on the include page or on the page itself?

I'd like to take a look at the code if you could send me a .zip file with the email page you referenced that works in the contents area.

Hi Ray

The server behaviors are applied on the include page.
I've sent you a .zip-file, containing both files.

Greetings

Willi