Matthew Ernisse Wrote:
"Do we have a list of criteria to help us decide what type of technology
solution we want to use? "
I might suggest the ease of edit, update, and adjustment of content to
help you decide.
Most content management systems (even commercial ones) can be pretty
daunting when it comes to the following basic tasks:
1) converting a page design or category structure( Information
Architecture) into a site. This includes building out templates etc...
This is not done often, but its useful to know if an engineer is required.
2) Ease of update or editing. How does the system compare to say, blog
software for ease of updating content
3) Platform support. I'm going to be very un politically correct for
this crowd, but you have people at osaf filling the role of copywriters,
illustrators, and designers. In the trade they might generally be called
"creatives," and they tend to create assets using commercial packages
(or email) How efficiently do each of these candidates work with such
packages (are there plug-ins for open office, for example that let you
'direct publish')
4) Don't expect a CMS to be much better than a wiki in terms of
templating. in some cases they may prove much worse.
I might also suggest that it may be worth looking at using the WIKI as
CMS for everything-- wiki has definite advantages for editing and
revisions, and I'm not sure its any more complicated in terms of setting
up templates(its the devil you know). Your current Wiki does offer some
support of arbitrary HTML for "central" pages. so its not a bad choice.
Matthew
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "Design" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/design
