yapic

@birgit Pauli-Haack

I read and hear a lot that available page builders are proprietary and Gutenberg will not be.

But testing Gutenberg for a while, I really can’t see the “openess” or the difference of it. For me, Gutenberg is as proprietary as the other page builders are.

It isn’t common usage to wrap every single paragraph in it’s own comment. It isn’t common to give specific formatting instructions to every block in addition to whats defined in the CSS.

In other page builders you also require to select every block separately to modify it. Which I personally take as one of the most annoying things in every pb.

Reusable blocks are also just a mix between shortcodes and widgets and they do not work much differently.

Creating a custom block with specific features has become complicated for designers. Gutenberg puts this work back to developers where as for now, some feature integrations such as custom metaboxes are feasible with the help of plugins and even most page builders are already compatible with these plugins. Can’t tell for Gutenberg.

In addition, there is no common library of blocks. They are defined in the theme, which again is not the sense of content being independent by themes or plugins.

And the argument that the content is completely reusable compared to other PBs is also only the half truth. Yes, the basic content is reusable. But due to the fact that the block features are inserted via comments and that these features are defined separately in other parts of the theme, makes is so proprietary that round tripping with other apps is not given as long as the other software does not render the Gutenberg block structure. I think you can see my points.

Gutenberg is actually only a very light version in competition to plugins, such as Beaver Builder, Elementor or the WPBakery Plugin. It is not different to other page builders, neither is it open. It only has a different UI.

• This reply was modified 7 years, 1 month ago by yapic.