The perennial “what is a CMS” debate broke out this week, with a fairly innocuous tweet from Dirk Shaw, “I am sorry but wordpress is hardly a web content management system.” that many of our CMS community waded into and included this post on CMS Myth arguing in favour and just about everyone arguing against… and crikey [...]
Integrating Microsoft ASP.NET into RedDot CMSIs it easy to integrate .NET into your RedDot CMS project? Yes it is, if you know how and obey some simple rules. This article gives you a best practice on how to include any .NET functionality for your published website within your RedDot CMS templates.
Inline code within a content class can’t be versioned as it could be with a version control system when developing standard .NET solutions outside of any CMS. You can’t develop or test properly using inline code within the CMS. Whenever you have to change the .NET part of your project you would need a RedDot Consultant or some of their knowledge and hence your project doubles up on resources. Don’t integrate inline code within your CMS.
There is a clear understanding of what your CMS should handle for you – your content – and what it should not take care of – styling and dynamic functionality may it be Javascript, .NET or any other scripting technology. The CMS is your data storage and management layer, the web server is your presentation and visualization layer and hence it is the point where dynamic functionality, styling and user interaction takes place. By keeping those parts separate you ensure to have a stable, scalable and furthermore easily maintain- and upgradeable Content Management Solution. Read more on this topic here
Instead of just adding a page directive followed by your inline code you should use user controls. Given that your code will be used on your website and not within the Open Text CMS ASP.NET User Controls are the best way to embedded dynamic functionality within your project.
There are basically two points where .NET is included in your template. The first one needs to be in every template which uses User Controls unless you integrate it using a container. The second one works as placeholder for the .NET functionality:
<reddot:cms><if><query valuea="Context:CurrentRenderMode" operator="==" valueb="Int:2"><htmltext> <%@ page language="C#" %> <%@ Register Src="~/UserControls/Search.ascx" TagName="Search" TagPrefix="uc" %> </htmltext></query></if></reddot:cms>
This example references a code behind file for a search used on the web server. It is placed in the top of every page instance created with this template. This way you only have to integrate the .NET reference once in each template. You can break it down to once per project if you use a container approach.
<body>
<div id="site">
<div id="header">
<reddot:cms><if><query valuea="Context:CurrentRenderMode" operator="==" valueb="Int:2"><htmltext>
<uc:Search ID="Search" runat="server"/>
</htmltext></query></if></reddot:cms>
This is the ASP.NET User Control for your search interface. Since you don’t run the search inside of your CMS project we have used a Render Tag to exclude this block from showing up within the CMS. If you want to be fancy you can put some placeholder content here by using a different Context:CurrentRenderMode block where you use valuea=”Context:CurrentRenderMode” operator=”<>” valueb=”Int:2″ to show HTML code only on the CMS server, you can read more about this here.
By following the example above whenever you have to update your .NET code you just have to change your .ascx file, there is no need to touch or even deploy the .ascx file to the CMS server. There is an approach of using the built-in .Net folder within RedDot CMS but since you might as well just upload your files manually I dare to say – Why bother? Ok, you should bother in a clustered server system where you publish to multiple publishing targets, but for a simple one CMS one web server setup you might as well just stick to manual deployments.
In RedDot we are able to insert User Control tag into any area of a page. If you have to influence settings or content areas you can use several ways to generate content and integrate those within .Net applications. You can use XML files published by RedDot CMS or user attributes with inline edited content to changed and/or edit properties. Those can be passed through to your User Controls. No need to use the CMS as IDE for your .NET solutions, keep all parts of your project separate and everything is just fine.
Are you interested in how to integrate CSS files within the CMS? Read this article here or on a high level understanding and “how to” for CSS and CMS in general this article here.
How do you integrate ASP.NET in your RedDot CMS projects?
Read more RedDot CMS best practice articles here.
Share and Enjoy:
This is a rant. I rarely write rants, but here is one. It is based on one of my largest pet peeves in the technology industry. It is about a commonly accepted term and not about the people who use it.
It is about “CMS”. This is a term that for many is synonymous with Web Content Management. This just gives me the screaming heebie jeebies. Let me illustrate.
I was at a meeting in DC called the Web Content Mavens recently. The topics of discussion should be obvious. I made a comment to a group there that there is content that isn’t web content. This person, an experienced “CMS” implementer did not believe that any such “content” existed. I used the easy examples of Word and Excel files. She immediately jumped to the conclusion that if it wasn’t web content, it was documents. I then fired some examples at her:
Her eyes lit up as if I had just revealed a whole new world of content to her. I didn’t. I revealed the world of content, not a new one. She hadn’t been living in the world of content. She had been in the world of web content.
There is more to Content Management than managing Web Content!!!
Being able to publish or host a website does not make something a CMS!!!
The Growing Itch
I first noticed the problem several years ago. I went to an event focused on Content Management Systems and noticed that everything focused on publishing a website. Ah, Web Content Management, I know a little on this topic, I thought to myself.
The problem is that people don’t think of it as WCM, or any similar terms. They think of it as CMS. This drives me NUTS! There are systems out there that manage content, quite well, but don’t publish to the web. They don’t get considered a CMS by many people.
I hate the term. It is a term that has such potential, but so many people use it in such a limited fashion. Qualify the thing with “Web CMS” or create a new friggin term.
Let’s look at some of the people using the term (keep in mind I like and respect most, if not all, of the people behind these sites)
There is a big world out there. All you Web CMS people need to give the term CMS back! It doesn’t belong to you. A long time ago you took it while the broader content community was trying to futz with the term ECM. By the time we realized what was happening, you had taken the term.
To whome does the term belong? That is a topic for another day.
A Quick Breath
This isn’t personal. Far from it. I read the websites listed above and find them valuable.
Pretty much everybody who reads this will have entered the industry with the term CMS firmly entrenched, incorrectly, into daily use. That is life. I had to get this off of my chest so that when I occasionally twitch when the topic of “What is a CMS” comes up in conversation, you know why.
I’m also going to not respond to comments. I’ll allow them and read them, but I’m not going to get sucked into an argument over a rant. This is a rant and there is a lot of irrational emotion that fuels it.
There has been a lot of debate of late on Twitter about whether or not WordPress is a CMS (ignoring the “WCM v CMS v ???” issue for now). Peter Monks is an proponent against the concept [Edit: He isn't, see comments], as is Irina Guseva, a senior editor for CMS Wire. Ron Miller over at Fierce Content Management says that WordPress is a CMS and Tony Byrne at CMS Watch says it is for a simple reason: Many organizations are using WordPress as a CMS. That makes it a CMS.
That is a fallacious argument. I’ll explain why in a second, but some important facts. This blog, Word of Pie, is hosted by WordPress.com and I love it. If I decided to host the blog personally, I would use WordPress. For my blogging needs, it is perfect.
So do not read into any of this as an indictment against WordPress.
Let’s look at the statement. If people use it as an X, it is an X. I can tell you right now, through my years of creating fun solutions while out camping, traveling, and owning a house, that is not a valid argument.
Those are a few examples that I had on the tip of my tongue. The point is that using something to solve a problem doesn’t make it designed to solve the problem.
Looking at all of the comments, here is one that sums up my opinion.
From Irina: WP is a publishing/blogging tool. It is not a #CMS, people…
To prove to me that WordPress is a CMS, the community needs to finish working on all of the definitions out there and get terms with which people agree. Then classify the systems because they vary quite a bit.
The fact that there is debate just reinforces that there is a lack of clarity.
The perennial “what is a CMS” debate broke out this week, with a fairly innocuous tweet from Dirk Shaw, “I am sorry but wordpress is hardly a web content management system.” that many of our CMS community waded into and included this post on CMS Myth arguing in favour and just about everyone arguing against… and crikey [...]
While Flash CMS is probably the best way to create a fancy, multi-functional website, there is always a chance to improve the user experience in website management. With exactly this purpose in mind FlashMint has released Mint Editor – a new offline content management software to edit and customize FlashMint XML templates at ease.
So, here’s a question…is WordPress a CMS?
And be careful how you respond.
The debate hit Twitter tonight triggered by a relatively harmless Tweet from Dirk Shaw:
I’ve been a part of similar discussions on how WordPress can or can’t scale to support larger sites. It wasn’t until another vendor and a CMS evangelist piled on in unanimous agreement that I felt the need to offer a brief reply in disagreement:
I’m not one to defend any one vendor, but it’s a silly argument.
Of course WordPress is a content management system. It’s technology that manages website content. And it manages quite a few websites I may add. I know plenty of fairly robust sites that get along just fine with WordPress. There’s of course a legitimate debate on what types of sites are best suited for WordPress.
But apparently I hit a third rail in the CMS world, because the comments kept flowing.
A number of other folks weighed in, including several that agreed that WordPress should be considered a CMS.
In the grand scheme, this is a relatively trivial debate. Even the folks siding against WordPress as a CMS were for the most part arguing for a different label or pointing out that it wasn’t “enterprise” enough to be considered a true CMS. Toss in a few open source fans and the debate can get religious in a hurry.
This is where the CMS world goes sideways. It’s insider baseball at the expense of the end user trying to make heads and tails of their web publishing strategy.
It still remains a vendor and consultant dominated landscape of folks trying to frame the space based on the tools and put up artificial walls based on product price points or analyst quadrants/waves. And yes, I lump myself into that bucket, although I try my hardest to stay on the outside.
Don’t even get us started on what to call our space (ECM, WCM, CMS, CM).
So, should WordPress be called a content management system? Absolutely.
Does it matter? Not really.
Related posts:
Merging HTML, CSS and RedDot templatesThis article covers the key factors for successful CSS and HTML integration into your RedDot CMS Open Text Content Management Server project. This best practice article outlines the major points to pay attention to when implementing your HTML into the CMS.
RedDot CMS is a fairly easy to use system when it comes down to templating. I am not saying it’s straight forward or a technological top notch solution. It also is not meant to be an IDE. The good thing to say about the CMS is that the elements are modularized to each single HTML object and can be used in an infinite number of ways. Pay attention to the best practice rules above and think about where your files and references will be used. When using the guidance above the HTML of your project will run smoothly on any platform and publishing target.
What is your RedDot CMS Consultant integration experience?
How do you use HTML and CSS within the RedDot CMS?
Have you ever had any trouble or even an “CMS integration epiphany”?
Read more RedDot CMS best practice articles here.
Share and Enjoy:
Social media is all the hype and for some reason a presence on Facebook seems like a definitive must for most companies. Judging from their Facebook presence many significant vendors seem to be better at talking than walking. Join marketing communication vendor Alterian and their 36 fans without any activity at all or become global CMS vendor FatWire’s 11th fan.
Facebook for business purposes has been heavily debated among experts and vendors alike since around 2007. Last year I asked when organisations would begin to take Facebook seriously and highlighted global pharmaceutical Merck and their less than 500 fans. As you’ll see below, vendors are not much better, even though they claim thought-leadership in social media.
As with most other new initiatives the usual best practice recommendation is that you should only get involved in Facebook, if you can dedicate enough time to manage it properly. Just like with my recent posting on mobile CMS vendors, this might be just another example of vendors not “eating their own dog food”. Still, I wonder why many vendors are not following any sorts of best practices?
Let’s take a look at a few vendors. Judge for yourself whether the vendor is doing a good job.
Alterian
36 fans is not very impressive for a vendor which prides itself on a strong social media offering. Note the complete lack of activity.
Autonomy
Claiming to be the leader in meaning-based computing and enterprise search, Autonomy has gathered only 49 fans. Note the complete lack of activity on the Wall.
Day Software
Unlike most who take Facebook seriously, Day has kept their old Facebook group and not migrated it to a page. Interesting how the wall has been visited by what looks like a spammer.
FatWire
14 fans is not many for one of the leading Web CMS vendors. To keep some momentum, FatWire posts press mentioning to their fans. A good use case for Facebook?
Percussion Software
Similar to direct competitor FatWire, Percussion has no real interaction on Facebook, but simply posts press releases to their group of 46 fans. Perhaps this is the future of press releases?
What can we learn?
It seems like Facebook is an arena in which both vendors and customers still have a lot to learn. Just like the famous Web Pages That Suck site teaches us something about worst practices by looking at bad web design, we can learn from looking at the worst vendors on Facebook.
Clearly to make the most of Facebook you need interaction. Interaction requires critical mass and more thought that just blindly posting press releases.
Have you ever had the need to produce a web site that needed dynamic CMS features and capabilities but felt that using one of the usual suspects (Drupal, Joomla!, Wordpress, etc.) was the equivalent of using a sledgehammer to kill a fly?
That’s certainly the feeling I had when finally getting around to refactoring a small site of mine that has been on the Internet since 1997. There had been numerous updates and tweaks made to the site over the years, but it was still based on static html pages and a bunch of customized (and poorly organized) javascripts. Adding or modifying content was a manual process.
I had almost talked myself into using Wordpress….
Read the remainder of this article.
