Hello Marco

Thanks for contacting us. Here are your answers:

1. If you use SP Page Builder to create the item, then there is default margin applied on left and right. You have to check the section/row and addon settings and remove the margins. Then the view will be the same.
2. There is only one option. If you turn on SP Page Builder integration, then all SP Simple Portfolio items has to be designed with SP Page Builder. If you keep it off, then all items will be on their own design. It is not possible to keep both.
3. If you create SP Simple Portfolio items with SP Page Builder, then it will be stored on sppagebuilder table on the database.
4. Sorry, this option is not available.

Best regards

Hello Ofi,

thanks for your quick reply!

Regarding point 1: I have not defined any spacing in the row - see image https://imgur.com/uK3CBAM

To point 2: Thanks, I noticed that - it was still a bit strange that I couldn't switch off the integration primary so easily. It took a few times until the slider remained in the position I had selected - when switching on and off the integration https://imgur.com/2qG1ya7

Regarding points 3 and 4: Of course content from SPPB pages is stored in the database - I misspoke, sorry! Wouldn't it be a good idea to be able to create the link by selecting an SPPB page - then it would also be possible to populate items with and items without SPPB pages! The page could then also be edited centrally via SPPB and stored there and also called up there and then does not have to be called up from SP Simple Portfolio if editing is necessary. The call for editing is made from two different places - that's what I want to write.

Regards - Marco

Another advantage that just occurred to me would be - the SPPB contents would then still be available even after the removal of SP Simple Portfolio, for example, and could also be accessed.

another point that seems a bit strange - in the created SPPB page the specification for level 2 headings is correct, but in the items of SP Simple Portfolio directly deposited text and headings are based on a separate CSS file and in this file a fixed value of 30px is stored for level 2 headings - https://imgur.com/YhbEkAn Interestingly, the page heading is not based on this CSS file, so in my case the level 1 heading is smaller than level 2 - not quite logical either - is it? https://imgur.com/AJCr23f

I think if you have found the cause behind the spacing. If not, then share your page link. I will investigate it. Regarding h2 font size, you can easily alter it by using Custom CSS. So, I do not think it is a major problem. I will share the idea to select SP Page Builder pages as SP Simple Portfolio items. The developer team will check and consider this.

Hello Ofi,

thank you for your replay!

The link is https://j5.dialogica.at/uebersicht/1-textverarbeitung

And this is a link to an item in which no content with SPPB is stored yet, but in the item itself https://j5.dialogica.at/uebersicht/3-tabellenkalkulation

Regards - Marco

Please go to SP Page Builder settings and set Max Container Width. I think you have set 1140px there.

prnt.sc/ZmlcXG_Uzvn_

Hello Ofi,

no - here is the setting - it is 1320px, as in all other installations I use - https://imgur.com/drc1zvn

But you are right, the width of this sppb-row-container is 1140px - as you can see here - https://imgur.com/YiuMg4R

On another page, without SP Simple Portfolio and also with SPPB the correct width is shown - https://imgur.com/qD7s3eI

Regards - Marco

Apology for the inconvenience. Please share your administrator access here to check the issue. Use the Hidden Content box to share the credentials. Make sure that you have a full site backup before sharing.

hello Ofi - there's the access

I have added a custom.css file under templates/shaper_helixultimate/css directory and added this CSS.

@media (min-width: 1400px) {
    .sppb-row-container {
        max-width: 1320px !important;
    }
}

It should be working now.

Thank you Ofi,

where does the specification that the width should be 1140px come from before you corrected it - are two different CSS files used here?

Regards - Marco