What you're kind of really asking is how does folks work out a BPM strategy in terms of CMS approaches.
CMS are an ambitious concept, its supposed to solve all of our Content Management needs, but in truth most are either too lite in terms of features or too complex. Some need further work in terms of continueing the respective needs.
The ones that allow you a base model to extend outward on are the ones in my pick, the better.
I've come to one conclusion when dealing with any business, workflows and business proceesses differ and trying to make them all conform to one goal, is a moving target.
To answer your question, ask yourself what the requirements are.
eg: A University who uses a CMS typically has a copyright budget, meaning they can only publish x% of copyright material online before they have to start paying for it. So when x user creates a new portion of content, that content then has to be weighed up against exsting known "copyright" assets ... then if one finds one, whats the protocol...
Point is, theres a million things that a CMS has to cover in terms of content, and each has their own set of guidelines / protocols handed down from various legal depts / advisors.
My thoughts are that most CMS's should attack from a workflow management perspective and focus on that rather then "you can now upload a doc and it has versioning and and it can assign roles to each person to open that doc and and and..."...
Establish what your flow reqs are, back track and see if you can formulate a strategy that can allow the stakeholders in question to govern the rules around the flows...
On 9/1/05, Tim McAuliffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Everyone,
A bit off topic, but given the number of people here working on large
sites I thought I'd ask...
What procedures/systems do you have in place for reviewing content on your
sites? Most CMS's out there have the basic capabilities of expiring or
flagging content for review after a certain time, but what about
triggering reviews in relation to, say, product changes? Do you have
general content review periods? Is someone responsible for locating
content to be reviewed and is it automated? Have you distributed
responsibility for content management or do you have a centralised editor?
I've been doing content management for several years now, but to be honest
I haven't seen a lot of good systems or procedures for systematically
reviewing published content. It'd be interesting to get some feedback from
others out there.
TIA
Tim
---
You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
--
Regards,
Scott Barnes
http://www.mossyblog.com --- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
