CMS Systems

by ls 20. May 2009 07:01

I have just one question:

What is up with this ridiculous "we need a new CMS" mantra?

We use a home-grown online CMS, that is incredibly efficient at managing the page-container-fragment hierarchy required to build consistently styled and structured web pages. The system doesn't care if the fragment assigned to a given container is a static piece of HTML, some javascript, an ASP.NET user control, whatever. So ultimately it is quite a flexible system.

But inevitably, every time a need arises for a page to look, act or behave differently from our standard set of page templates, the cry goes up for a new CMS. It's too bad the town criers are confusing the CMS with the story and front editing tools sititng on top of it.

How about you guys let those of us who have a deep understanding of how content is stored and retrieved and how web pages are built make the decisions about whether or not a "new CMS" is needed, eh? How about you just try to describe business requirements, and not prescribe technology solutions, eh? How about that? Then maybe we could actually get down to discussing the real issues, and not the red herrings.

Tags:

Content Management | Site Features

Comments are closed

Powered by BlogEngine.NET 1.5.0.7
Theme by Mads Kristensen

About me

I've been at USA TODAY for almost 10 years, in various roles. Currently I'm the Director of Product Technology, a title that is sufficiently vague to keep my colleagues wondering what exactly I do, but important sounding enough to impress vendors. I started this blog because I got tired of just bitching at Joel Sucherman about this stuff. And now I can't even bitch at him any more because he's at NPR.

Find me on:
LinkedIn
Facebook
USATODAY.com