hey jonas, how are you. I appreciate your ivestigative approach. it throws another light onto the cms debate, rather from a developer angle. I reckon this really important, as the interchange between coding developers and the community of supporting users tends to be too low in general.
Am Montag, 14. März 2005 19:29 schrieb Jonas Smedegaard: > My intend was to point out that diversity comes at a price. And that > Skolelinux may be aware of that, but maybe not. So you responded that > you are very well aware and have indeed chosen deliberately to put > this extra burden onto the contributors. Fine... I doubt that this is valid generally: True maybe for contents that is made by developers for developers - what has been called rather "static". But as for information that is (to be) written by users for users (teachers, pupils), a usable CMS is not only a facility. It empowers / recrutes a huge amount of possible contributers: Entire classes can work in their language on documentation and teaching materials. So, I'd rather call it a shift of burden onto the shoulders of those the contents aim to. Now from my memory, the push and pull factors that make a migration worth a thought: - Plone: - content and layout is not separated. - you are stuck to the initial format - no stable sftp / cvs interface - no translation utility / notification on change + eZ: + content and layout is separated + all pages can be exported in any supported format + interfaces for easy mirroring / console access + each page can be stored in separate languages, the selected locale is displayed if available. + translation function: registered translators are notified in case of changes; tranlating editor. + support of oowriter (sxw) format Regards Ralf.
