Seth asked for some use cases that show what a content management system (CMS) can do. I wanted to run them by this group, see what your ideas are.
What would the CMS do? Manage content for Fedora sites. fedoraproject.org, primarily.
There are multiple roles:
* Editor - logs into a workbench with entire work queue visible: - Can approve content or push it back for further writing/edits - If configured, cannot edit the document, can only push forward or backward - Push to publish - Directly to Web, or enables an autobuild of some kind, or pushes to a higher level publisher
* Writer - Write content from scratch or amalgamate - Can use built-in CMS editing functionality, attach a document of some kind, or check into CVS and point at that as content submission. - May modify a work when it is pushed back from an editor. - Modification of published work generates a new workflow, requiring the same level of approval as previously - If configured, may retire or set expiration date for own content. - When ready, can push own content to editor
* Lead Writer - As above for Writer, can also be injected into the workflow for a pre-approval/denial step prior to pushing to Editor. - Can act upon any content from project they lead as if the sole writer, that is, can modify into the workflow, set expiration, etc.
* Publisher/Editor-in-chief - Final approver for sensitive content (legal, special marketing) - May have ability to directly edit content, depending on usage model.
* Content Manager - Looks for content to retire or revitalize - Can immediately retire or set expiration date - Can dig up old content and push it for a rewrite - Lands in appropriate writer queue
That's what I've got off the top of my head.
Thanks - Karsten
Uttered Karsten Wade kwade@redhat.com, spake thus:
That's what I've got off the top of my head.
I'll be you feel much lighter now.
All this sounds terribly formalized; is there really a need for so many task divisions? I have no experience with such a CMS, so I'm not qualified to have an opinion, but where is the current setup inadequate? I'm not objecting, just asking for a sales pitch ;-)
Cheers
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 06:28 -0600, Tommy Reynolds wrote:
Uttered Karsten Wade kwade@redhat.com, spake thus:
That's what I've got off the top of my head.
I'll be you feel much lighter now.
Much.
All this sounds terribly formalized; is there really a need for so many task divisions? I have no experience with such a CMS, so I'm not qualified to have an opinion, but where is the current setup inadequate? I'm not objecting, just asking for a sales pitch ;-)
See, this was why I asked this question here. :)
Simple, the folks on fedora-websites-list have been discussing using a CMS to manage the formal Fedora websites. One advantage is that it is like a Wiki, user friendly to readers, authors, and content maintainers.
I just found myself trying to explain what a CMS brings that, say, a Wiki with ACLs cannot do. To be honest, I'm not settled on my thoughts about what to do. A CMS has value. We could also install the lightest framework (Moin Moin + Python based framework, like Django) and build what we need as we go.
That, however, requires resources that might be elsewhere. So, yeah, etc., just trying to scope the idea a bit. :)
thanks - Karsten
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 12:50 -0800, Karsten Wade wrote:
Simple, the folks on fedora-websites-list have been discussing using a CMS to manage the formal Fedora websites. One advantage is that it is like a Wiki, user friendly to readers, authors, and content maintainers.
I just found myself trying to explain what a CMS brings that, say, a Wiki with ACLs cannot do. To be honest, I'm not settled on my thoughts about what to do. A CMS has value. We could also install the lightest framework (Moin Moin + Python based framework, like Django) and build what we need as we go.
I think that the issue that I have with Wiki is more to do with the expectations than the technology itself.
Pages on a Wiki site are never finalised, and get edited incrementally by whoever has something to contribute. For prominent pages I think that there ought to be a way of separating in-progress work from a done/approved/unleash on the public version - perhaps more a feature of CMS.
At a technical level I don't really distinguish between Wikis with access control and CMS with on-line editing - different CMS/Wiki/portal products do seem to encourage different working styles, though.
Wikis often have poor navigation. The current moinmoin wiki definitely has poor navigation. A good CMS should have some sense of hierarchy available, imho.
--g
_____________________ ____________________________________________ Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the ] [ dumb. --mcluhan
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, Stuart Ellis wrote:
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 12:50 -0800, Karsten Wade wrote:
Simple, the folks on fedora-websites-list have been discussing using a CMS to manage the formal Fedora websites. One advantage is that it is like a Wiki, user friendly to readers, authors, and content maintainers.
I just found myself trying to explain what a CMS brings that, say, a Wiki with ACLs cannot do. To be honest, I'm not settled on my thoughts about what to do. A CMS has value. We could also install the lightest framework (Moin Moin + Python based framework, like Django) and build what we need as we go.
I think that the issue that I have with Wiki is more to do with the expectations than the technology itself.
Pages on a Wiki site are never finalised, and get edited incrementally by whoever has something to contribute. For prominent pages I think that there ought to be a way of separating in-progress work from a done/approved/unleash on the public version - perhaps more a feature of CMS.
At a technical level I don't really distinguish between Wikis with access control and CMS with on-line editing - different CMS/Wiki/portal products do seem to encourage different working styles, though.
--
Stuart Ellis
stuart@elsn.org
Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
GPG key ID: 7098ABEA GPG key fingerprint: 68B0 E291 FB19 C845 E60E 9569 292E E365 7098 ABEA
On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 18:35 -0500, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
Wikis often have poor navigation. The current moinmoin wiki definitely has poor navigation. A good CMS should have some sense of hierarchy available, imho.
I agree. That what kind of what I was driving at... MoinMoin is designed to be unstructured to match the Wiki way of working (throw down stuff as you need it). We can beat the current set of pages into a particular shape, and use the technical functions to do CMS stuff, but it will always encourage a loose structure, and contributors will always treat it as a Wiki rather than a standard heirarchical site.
docs@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org
-
Greg DeKoenigsberg -
Karsten Wade -
Stuart Ellis -
Tommy Reynolds