Reasoning for best practice messages on Design Template and Full Section Editor
A section previously existed using Full Section Editor which used properties grouped inside layouts to control visiblity conditions for different groups of properties. During an upgrade this was switched back to a design template. This stripped the layouts and the visibility conditions within them. Easy enough to find and fix but in the interest of preventing this in the future I was curious why and if I could better follow Pega's interests.
I am guessing this was done because of the message on layouts stating the use of Full Section Editor does not follow best practices of using a design template and gives a link to convert it back without any checks or warnings.
On the other side, the Design Template gives a similar message and link stating you can access full design capabilities. This makes it sound desirable and I feel it is.
My concern is why would using pretty standard functionalities such as layouts be considered not a best practice? Following that, is it expected or better to not have groupings and use a visibility condition on each individual property on a design template or does it just need to be regrouped when converting it back?
I am asking because resolving this issue made me realize that I almost never use design templates. It feels very restrictive and is more difficult to visualize designs. When I troubleshoot sections, I immediately convert to full section editor and I usually leave it.
Is this wrong?
What are others ideas on this?
Maybe for another discussion is why this removed paragraph spacing?