The one alternative that can be worth considering is Contribute
(Adobe) which I used for one project. It's quite lightweight and easy
to get to grips with but is not a proper CMS -- it just lets users
edit existing pages and create new ones. The main problem with it is
there is an additional cost overhead
The cost of the contribute software is $200-250. When you compare this
to the additional costs of developing a site using a full CMS it
probably isn't unreasonable
for the end-user who has to buy
the software (and presumably upgrade it at some point)
I don't think that you would need to upgrade - the version I used
(admittedly a long time ago) would still work today, just without some
of the cooler features. Of course, Adobe have really integrated more
recent releases with Dreamweaver these days. This could be a bit of a
turn-off as a developer.
As for the learning curve, I agree totally. The learning curve,
particularly with packages such as Drupal, is huge. But then again, the
first CSS site that you create has a huge learning curve that, once
climbed, reaps huge benefits. I actually find it quicker to develop a
site in a CMS than as static pages due to the modularity of the whole
process - changes to the HTML structure can be made to the whole site
very quickly, and little things like the link to the current page are
automatically assigned a class. These things make a big difference.
**************************************************************
Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**************************************************************
