10 Comments

  1. Jb Audras
    · Reply

    As the author of the Reusable Blocks Extended plugin and as a fervent user of reusable blocks and patterns, I can tell this sounds like a good change.

    Reusable Blocks is a king feature. The king is dead, long live the king!

    Report

  2. Edith
    · Reply

    100% agree! The “reusable block” has caught me out before as I assumed it would save styling options but I didn’t realise it also saved content / text. My intention was to create a pre-styled block a client could “re-use” with different content and boy, was I wrong. Renaming sounds great, especially as reusable blocks are a great feature once you know how it works.

    Report

  3. Yui
    · Reply

    What about “My blocks” ? It emphasises them belonging to personal (or site) library of blocks, somewhat personal to user.

    We’re using this term in russian WordPress translation instead of ‘Reusable blocks’ , there been some discussions about renaming that or finding another term, but ‘My blocks’ has also good point.

    Report

  4. Jakob
    · Reply

    I think “Synced” blocks makes sense. As a developer, “Global” makes sense to me, but that nomenclature is not as obvious outside of that world. Maybe “Site-wide” blocks or something to that effect?

    Not sure what the best way to communicate that “This block can be put on multiple pages, and updating the content in one spot also updates it across the site“

    Report

  5. Mr. Nobody
    · Reply

    To me “Synced” is too developery to be helpful. Sure, it accurately describes the technical process but a good name is one that doesn’t need an explanation. It’s like a joke you have to explain, it’s not funny anymore.

    I like Yui suggestion of “My Blocks”. Sure, it’s a bit vague but I think it really captures the feature. Its a block or collection of blocks that I’ve set up.

    I’m also curious if there is any data on how people use that feature. I’ve never used it for it “syncedness”. I treat it more like a custom pattern generator. I save a snippet that I use a lot. Add it to a new post and then convert it to a regular block. To be honest, I don’t see much value in a block that is synced. That almost seems like FSE territory.

    Report

  6. Otshelnik-fm
    · Reply

    permanent block, mirror block, communicating block, twin block
    – reflects mirroring, similarity and uniformity

    Report

  7. Mike
    · Reply

    I use it for boilerplate content, contact info, etc. email addresses, phone numbers, etc. but when I build sites for others, they rarely understand that if you change it here, it is changed everywhere.

    I vote for ‘Synced Content’ – to emphasise the content is synced across the site, not just the style of the block.

    Plus, the prompt for saving the block should be changed from: “are you ready to save the following blocks” to: “are you ready to sync…”

    Report

  8. Randy Walker
    · Reply

    The thing about these blocks is that they’ve got content in them. Also, these aren’t plceholder/templates. If you change if one place, you change it in all others it’s used. You’re almost inserting a reference to a block that is stored elsewhere.

    What about “Content Reference Blocks”?

    (Outside of the scope of this ticket, it sounds like additional work is needed to make users aware of the synced/linked nature of these blocks)

    Report

  9. Bobby Thompson
    · Reply

    I guess sync’ed blocks is from Notion, so some people already understand the concept due to their education.

    It’s been interesting to use both of these block interfaces side by side most of my days as they develop.

    Report

  10. Nick
    · Reply

    My vote is for Synced or Mirror Blocks

    Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: