Geoff Deering wrote: > Seeing I started this thread, and Paul was just trying to help me out, > I'll take the blame for the confusion. Yes, I know Contribute is not a > CMS, and many of the applications that are discussed on this list may > not fit the true definition of a CMS, but for developers who try to work > and maintain web standards, we are often forced to cobble together > anything possible so that users can manage content on their sites whilst > trying to preserve the integrity of the code that is used to build the > interface.
Sure, but misuse of words doesn't help anything. :-) It wasn't you who used the term CMS in relation to Contribute, but to reiterate: Contribute *doesn't manage content*. It allows an end user to *edit* content. It's a "site maintenance" tool, if you will. > In this particular instance, a text box area for adding content, as in > TXP, etc, does not meet the clients needs, ... Interesting -- could you expand on that? > Also, it is not completely clear as to whether > or not that MMCont3 is evolving into a CMS with it's server component > now. cite: <http://macromedia.com/software/contribute/server/> Compatible: The Contribute Publishing Server is compatible with existing web and IT infrastructure and works across platforms, enabling web publishing in almost any computing environment. It can also be used to extend the value of existing content management systems (CMS) and learning management systems (LMS). So it looks like C3 adds access control and an audit trail, which can be useful, but still doesn't constitute a "CMS". IMHO :-) -- Hassan Schroeder ----------------------------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com dream. code. ********************************************************* The CMS discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *********************************************************
