Solved

Content Models vs content Types

  • 31 December 2022
  • 3 replies
  • 48 views

I find the seemingly interchangeable "content models" / "content types" terminology confusing.

It might make more sense if "Content Models" were singular ("Content Model"):

 

 

It would make it clearer to users that their content model comprises one or more content types (of which global fields are one kind). In this case, there is a clear distinction: the content type is part of the content model but not vice versa.

Or am I missing something?

icon

Best answer by Russell Swanker 6 January 2023, 22:52

View original

3 replies

Badge

Hello, Clement! 

Thanks for your feedback. I can see how these labels may be confusing. We’ll certainly take this into consideration as we continue to improve usability in our product.

A few things to note that might help for now:

As you probably already know, a Content Type defines the structure for content that will appear in your app or website. The content type is where you define which fields, like global fields, RTEs, etc., a particular page or screen will contain. 

The concept of content models is not intended to be interchangeable with the concept of content types. Rather, content types are just one kind of model that may need to be defined. That is not clear in the current state, where content types are the only option.

In the future, perhaps our product also allows you to model something like asset types. In this case, one might navigate to "Content Models" and then see that it contains options to navigate to “Content Types” or “Asset Types”, where you could work on the relevant models for either. I can see how “content” might be too broad of a term, though. Isn’t an asset a type of content? So there is work to be done here on our end.

Lastly, we did not intend for fields (like global fields) to be thought of as "content types". They are meant to be structural components within a content type. Perhaps we need to also make this more clear.

So, to sum up, a content type (which contains fields) is really just one kind of content model. In the future there may be other kinds of things that need to be modeled. In that case, "Content Models" is where any of that work would be done.

Again, I understand how this may be confusing given the current state. I'll be sure this feedback is shared with the rest of our UX team—its clearly an area worth reconsideration.

As we continue to improve the user experience of our product, we’ll need to ensure that labeling and navigation make sense to our users. Let me know if you'd like to be included in any usability testing that occurs related to this topic.

For those who are interested, our Knowledge Base contains lots of useful info about Content Types; including this overview.

Thanks Russell. Yes please, I would be happy to be included in usability testing.

Badge

Great! I will add you to my participants list and will reach out when we have initiatives that might be of interest. Thank you!

Reply