Talk:Web content management system

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Should these links below be included?

Vendor Neutral Articles About Content Management Systems

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.90.147 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Duh, NO. Why do you keep on with this? Link to the original articles or not at all. · rodii · 16:54, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
When I think of CMS, I think of either 'web-based' or 'desktop' software. From there, I think the divisions are mostly PHP or ASP. Then there is Open Source or Commercial. Some CM systems only manage content, some manage people, some do both.
In any case, this article should be merged together with Content Management Systems, unless it is only going to address "Web" (as in web-based CMS software). In such case, perhaps it should be renamed "Browser-Based" CMS. Browser-based software eliminates all desktop software save the browser. Soon someone will be by, to either delete or edit the content on this page. They will only need their web-browser to instantly make changes.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.90.147 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Note: This previously blanked talk page reconstructed by dcljr (talk) 11:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC) -- See User talk:24.137.90.147 for related discussion.

saj j f djf jdj jdj f jd jf jf jdf

[edit] Does this page serve any useful purpose?

There's very little content on this page; there's more about web content management at Content_management_system. In addition, there are some contradictions between the two pages. I don't have any preference either way, but it seems that either the relevant content from Content_management_system should be moved here, or this page should be removed. Groogle 23:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it really adds a great deal. Most content management systems have some web element these days. There's a lot of fluff in the CMS articles generally, and the section in Content management system is to an extent worse - its a loose collection of unsourced requirements that apply just as well to almost any system. Also, most of these systems exist on a continuum from simple templating systems (eg Bloxsom, nanoblogger, instiki) to the 'enterprisey' systems like BroadVision. If the two articles were merged, more eyes might improve the content.
BTW I cleaned the article up a bit - the baking/frying/parbaking terminology was only used by a single author (ghits in single figures). Systems often describe themselves as offline if they do the preprocessing thing; the online systems more often use the term 'dynamic' (but not Dynamic HTML, as previously stated in this article, thats something else entirely). It was bugging me seeing all those redlinks crop up in my watchlist, the terms arent in common use at all. Bazzargh (talk) 14:06, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] test

test —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.201.214.30 (talk) 06:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)