Everyone in tech loves static site generators. But are they the best way to author content? Not by a long shot. However, a WordPress static site generator might be just what your company needs. Here’s how combining the power of WordPress with the speed of a static site can provide the best of both worlds.
The pros of static site generators
Many tech companies publish their blogs and other non-docs content using static site generators like Gatsby (now part of Netlify), Hugo, and Jekyll.
Using a static site generator, you typically write content using a visually agnostic syntax such as Markdown. You then build the HTML from the markdown in combination with a template. The result is a collection of HTML files, images, CSS files, and JavaScript files you can host on a static Web site engine, such as Amazon S3.
There are several benefits to using static site generators. Speed is number one. Since there’s no server-side code running, everything loads quickly. That’s good for users - and good for search engine placement to boot. It also means the site will have zero issues scaling out if demand spikes.
Cost is another. It can cost hundreds to thousands of dollars a month to host a server-side Content Management System (CMS) solution. By contrast, a typical static website will run you around $1 to $3 USD per month.
Finally, it’s easy to build a DevOps-like automated publishing process around a static website. If you store the site’s content in Git, you can easily create a Pull Request-driven review and publication process.
The cons of static site generators
However, there are a lot of downsides to static site generation. Some of them you’ll feel instantly. Others are challenges you may not encounter until you onboard multiple authors.
There’s no consistent editing experience
One of the big benefits of a CMS is the editing experience. A CMS usually supports a rich WYSIWYG-style editor that simplifies writing. Contributors generally don’t have to know HTML, Markdown, or any other language to create new content.
By contrast, static websites don’t have a built-in editor. Most contributors use a programmatic editor, like Visual Studio Code.
Engineers like this because tools like VS Code are their bread and butter. But it also means writers have fewer tools at their disposal to assist with writing. For example, no reliable SEO content optimization tool has a VS Code extension.
Static sites generally require Git - and no one likes Git
Unless you want authors stepping over everyone and obliterating each other’s revisions, your static site needs to use a version control system. These days, that means Git.
The problem? No one likes Git.
I’m sorry, but it’s true.
Look, Git is a great tool. It does what it does well. But it has a steep learning curve. That learning curve is even steeper if you don’t live and breathe Git.
Most software engineers have gotten used to Git because they’re forced to use it every day. However, most technical writers I know despite it and view it as a hindrance to their work.
I’ve developed publishing systems for technical training based on Git. I worked at Microsoft, where we had a large, enterprise-grade content publishing system built on GitHub. And I can tell you that, in both cases, using Git was the number one source of every content developer’s frustration.
Collaboration is harder
Git also isn’t a great tool for collaborating on content. Collaboration requires making multiple check-ins and check-outs. It’s highly likely someone, at some point, will generate a merge conflict, requiring a meeting and perhaps even technical support to resolve.
Permissions are also arguably harder to manage. If you have access to a Git repo, you have access to everything in that repo. Often, you need much more granular permissions in a CMS. For example, someone may be a Contributor and have access to their own content, while another person may be an Editor with global access to all content.
Why use WordPress?
This is why most companies with multiple authors drive content through a CMS. A CMS is built to support content workflows vs. code workflows. It provides a single, centralized location that supports a WYSIWYG editor, various editing tools, role-based permissions control, a publication management process, and more.
While headless CMS are all the rage these days, many companies still use WordPress as their CMS for technical content. And for good reason:
- It’s easy to set up. WordPress is easy to run on any cloud provider. Companies like Kinsta offer scalable WordPress hosting as a service, removing the overhead required to set up and scale it.
- You can support collaboration easily. WordPress supports a rich role-based access control system so you can manage permissions more precisely.
- WordPress has a rich plugin ecosystem, making it easy to add additional functionality to support authoring. Most content optimization tools, such as Yoast SEO and SEMRush SEO Writing Assistant, support WordPress.
- It supports easier, configurable content workflows via plugins such as Oasis and PublishPress.
Why use a WordPress static site generator?
However, WordPress has one downside: it tends to be slow. That’s because, by default, pages are generated dynamically at runtime via PHP.
There are ways to speed this up. Using a combination of a Content Delivery Network (CDN) and a caching plugin such as WP Rocket, you can get great performance out of any WordPress installation. However, that takes time and money to set up and maintain.
This raises the question: Can you get the benefits of a static Web site while still using WordPress as your authoring environment?
The answer is: yes!
Using a plugin like Simply Static, you can author in WordPress but generate your site statically. This means you get the speed of a static site with all of the collaboration support and authoring assistance that WordPress provides.
The pros and cons of using a WordPress static site generator
Besides making your site load faster, a WordPress static site generator will save you money. Hosting a scalable WordPress solution gets more expensive as your site’s content grows in popularity. By contrast, if you’re only using WordPress for authoring, you only need a small, scaled-down installation that can support a handful of simultaneous users.
The downside to using WordPress to publish statically is that you lose any runtime dynamic generation features. For example, you can’t control page generation based on a logged in user’s identity or generate targeted promotions.
If you want to support dynamic features, you can use client-side JavaScript libraries. You can also leverage server-side automation services like Zapier for actions such as processing form submissions.
Using a WordPress static site generator
How does a WordPress static site generator work?
First, you need to install a plugin that enables static site generation. Simply Static appears to be the leader here. The plugin is in active development mode and has a strong rating (4.5/5) as of this writing.
You should also decide how you’re going to host WordPress. WordPress-centric hosting providers like Kinsta make this easy by handling all the technical details of installation. Simply Static recommends SpinupWP for easy and cheap WordPress server hosting.
(If you’re a one-person shop, you can go offline completely by running WordPress locally with a tool like LocalWP. However, LocalWP isn’t practical for collaboration.)
Next, you set up WordPress as you normally would. This involves selecting a theme and installing any additional plugins you might need. For example, you might use Elementor for page design, Yoast SEO for content optimization, and WPForms for form submissions.
Finally, you need to set up a deployment mechanism. This will differ depending on how you intend to host the website. When I host static sites, I generally use an Amazon S3 website bucket. However, Kinsta also offers free static site hosting. (I’ve used hosted WordPress from Kinsta for years and swear by it.)
Setup complexity will differ depending on what method you use. For example, Amazon S3 integration requires an access key and secret key for your AWS account with write permissions to your S3 bucket. Kinsta static site support, meanwhile, relies on GitHub integration.
Conclusion
Using a static site doesn’t mean you have to choose between cheap and powerful. Using a WordPress static site generator, you can host a single, collaborative tool for managing content while spending mere pennies on publishing.
