Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Edit only fields within Reusable block, keep styles #50661

Closed
merijnponzo opened this issue May 16, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Edit only fields within Reusable block, keep styles #50661

merijnponzo opened this issue May 16, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@merijnponzo
Copy link

Hello,

With my first Full Site Editing projects, me and my clients are having troubles to keep up pages style consistent.

I hoped that the Resuable block was the solution by editing it styles fromout the Resuable block within the reusable block admin, and add content within the pages the block is used.

But as long i don't detach the blok/ or turn it into it's own entity, it's not possible to get unique content per block, but keep up the styles.

Having a reusable block with individual content is in fact dynamic, or would require generated styles fromout the original block.
This would be very challenging development wise.

However, keeping 12 pages style consistant with the same colors, margins, paddings is very challenging as well, with my first projects I am truly considering going back to custom fields with consistent classes.

I'm sure this is widely discussed with designing the Gutenberg architecture, or am i missing some functionality here?

@carlomanf
Copy link

It's currently being discussed at: #48458, #50456, #50060

@priethor
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for providing your feedback, @merijnponzo! As @carlomanf says, this is already being considered in the abovementioned issues. If you don't mind, let's close this one in favor of the existing ones 🙏

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants