SPUG:Content Management software: opinions?

[Alan]

On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:04:51PM -0800, Aaron Salo wrote:
> Novice users expect it to work like MS Office, they think they can drag n
> drop that word doc onto an icon and have it spring to life in the site,
> highlight this and press <CTRL-B> to bold it, yada yada, thus the
> ubsequious MS F'edPage and its ilk. There is no one size fits all solution.

I hate to say it, but this is why things like MSOffice and Frontpage
exist, and do well, because they let you say "just point frontpage to
this url and then edit this file", they get a WYSIKWYGBSS (what you see is
kinda what you get but still sucks) system where they can paste their
word doc txt into the document, edit it just like in word, have all the
nifty stuff like spell check, etc.  Or the sysadmin just says "save the
press release as html and put it on //foo/shared/web/press-releases, and
they do, and it works, mostly.  

A splendid example of this looking horrible is the gym up the road for
me's site www.vrcfitness.ca - looks fine in IE, but in anything else,
forget it.  View source and you see that it's an Office page saved as
HTML... (or is that HTM?).  *sigh*

Maybe someone should develop an app/protocol/system based on webdav  or
whatever to do this under linux, and allow publishing from OOo, abiword,
etc.  I guess you could say that mozilla composer does this, but...

Anyway, enough, more beer, less typing!

alan

-- 
Alan <alan at ufies.org> - http://arcterex.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"The only thing that experience teaches us is that experience teaches 
us nothing.	        -- Andre Maurois (Emile Herzog)