Context: I'm the creator an open source page builder in Ruby on Rails named Maglev (https://www.maglev.dev), pretty much similar to Primo (congrats for their product, looks amazing!).
A couple of months, I used my own tool (Maglev) when revamping an e-commerce site of a client who didn't have a content management system to edit the marketing part of her site.
So I sliced the site into editable "Maglev" sections/blocks. The result was great in terms of editing experience BUT a couple of months later after the launch, my client hired another marketing person with HTML/CSS "skills" (I'd say 101 HMTL/CSS level).
And I had a hard time to convince her that it was a bad idea to write HTML/CSS code herself but instead to let me (or another developer) write the missing sections she wanted.
A solution would have been to add in Maglev some kind of dev editor like in Primo. However, based on my long experience, you really don't want your client to touch the HTML/CSS of your site. And I don't believe in the "you break it, you pay for it" mojo or at least this is not the kind of relationship I want with my clients.
On a higher level, any kind of CMS has the same issue. For instance, I helped a company with a broken Webflow site and it was the typical issue: a designer built their site and later the marketing person tried to "improve" the UI and broke everything.
> However, based on my long experience, you really don't want your client to touch the HTML/CSS of your site.
Certainly, and in the same vein you don't want your client touching the design of the site. Clients can barely write good copy, much less make good design decisions. My freelance projects go a lot more smoothly now that I can hand off the site to the client knowing that they're restricted to adding/removing blocks and updating content (and that they can't see the 'open code' button).
A couple of months, I used my own tool (Maglev) when revamping an e-commerce site of a client who didn't have a content management system to edit the marketing part of her site. So I sliced the site into editable "Maglev" sections/blocks. The result was great in terms of editing experience BUT a couple of months later after the launch, my client hired another marketing person with HTML/CSS "skills" (I'd say 101 HMTL/CSS level). And I had a hard time to convince her that it was a bad idea to write HTML/CSS code herself but instead to let me (or another developer) write the missing sections she wanted.
A solution would have been to add in Maglev some kind of dev editor like in Primo. However, based on my long experience, you really don't want your client to touch the HTML/CSS of your site. And I don't believe in the "you break it, you pay for it" mojo or at least this is not the kind of relationship I want with my clients.
On a higher level, any kind of CMS has the same issue. For instance, I helped a company with a broken Webflow site and it was the typical issue: a designer built their site and later the marketing person tried to "improve" the UI and broke everything.