|
|
|
Killersites.com Forum » List all forums » » Forum: Blogs and CMS Forum » » » Thread: CMS (Content Management System) : Accessibility [10/030/08] |
||
| Print at May 21, 2013 12:01:23 PM |
|
|
| Posted by LSW at Sep 10, 2005 4:04:25 AM |
|
Re: CMS (Content Management System) : Accessibility The real problem for us is that it allows the owner to update and maintain the site. Traditionally we get a simple payment for the web site, hard to live off that. So the real money for us was maintaining the site, a regular income. That falls away for the most part with CMS. It is in the stars how we will deal with that. |
| Posted by admin at Sep 10, 2005 3:35:19 PM |
|
Re: CMS (Content Management System) : Accessibility "So the real money for us was maintaining the site, a regular income. " Yes, I see that falling away. But I see new doors opening up as well. I think you can see higher end web sites considering all the built in features found in many CMS/blog. You can say install plug-ins and creat e new templates for the CMS. Instead of providing a static set of web pages, you will be able to offer a 'system', a tool for the business. With change comes opportunity. ---------------------------------------- Stefan Mischook Video Tutorial Store | Web Templates |
| Posted by Robbkore at Sep 21, 2005 12:31:04 AM |
|
Re: CMS (Content Management System) : Accessibility The real problem for us is that it allows the owner to update and maintain the site. Traditionally we get a simple payment for the web site, hard to live off that. So the real money for us was maintaining the site, a regular income. That falls away for the most part with CMS. It is in the stars how we will deal with that. But who is going to update the CMS/Blog software? I don't think the client could dl, install , and reconfigure those. You can also get a better edge on things by doing some minor redesign work. I am going to get working on my own methods for dealing with things like this, to make it a part of the business, instead of a hinderance. :) |
| Posted by LSW at Oct 6, 2005 6:37:04 AM |
|
Re: CMS (Content Management System) : Accessibility I have added a number of new CMSs that I have come across recently.
|
| Posted by shelfimage at Oct 6, 2005 9:51:47 AM |
|
Re: CMS (Content Management System) : Accessibility [06/10/05] Hi, Thanks for the link to subdreamer. I'm looking at it now. It looks very user-friendly for a client to manage after the inital set-up. The code makes me a bit uncomfortable. No DOCTYPE, seems a bit messy, but it is solid and the cms seems to have a good track record. And, as I mentioned the admin functions are easy. The image gallery is a Big plus - lots of customization. It won't validate (I haven't tried, just a guess) and probably not accessible. One of my clients is a social services non-profit company and (they may not know this yet) but it is important to them to have an accessible site (at least as much as I can provide for them). My other option is Nucleus CMS, which I've used only as a blog. The newer version seems promising with a lot of plugins and the admin is ok to work with from a client point of view. More training on my end for my clients though. I have a demo key for QnECMS and will take a look at it today again for my social services client. - ---------------------------------------- "The art of life lies in a constant readjustment to our surroundings." -Okakura Kakuzo Save the developers<!> Maine Webworks |
| Posted by LSW at Oct 6, 2005 10:15:26 AM |
|
Re: CMS (Content Management System) : Accessibility [06/10/05] Keep in mind with accessibility and CMSs, accessibility is one part the back end, course that is generally only interesting if the owner has employees who are disabled or a open community type where anyone can add content. The other part is output. QnECMS does put out god outpit as well as adding alt attributes etc., so alot has to do with your Template, accessible input often results in accessible output. A DOCTYPE may be easy to add in it's code or your template. Things like Mambo that place every peice of new info in a tables are worthless. So a CMS like Subdreamer may still be rweakable to be accessible and standards if you can easily find and tweak the code. |
| Posted by shelfimage at Oct 6, 2005 1:24:19 PM |
|
Re: CMS (Content Management System) : Accessibility [06/10/05] LOL - I like the new guy [avatar]!  ---------------------------------------- "The art of life lies in a constant readjustment to our surroundings." -Okakura Kakuzo Save the developers<!> Maine Webworks |
| Posted by maz0 at Dec 15, 2005 5:27:52 AM |
|
Re: CMS (Content Management System) : Accessibility [24/10/05] Polopoly is writen in Java and xml, and it not cheap. To buy it you have to pay something in between 100000 to 125000 US$. sorry for the bad spelling |
| Posted by LSW at Dec 15, 2005 5:42:05 AM |
|
Re: CMS (Content Management System) : Accessibility [24/10/05] Guess that is why they make it so hard to find the price! Like I sailarger corporations etc., but you never know when someone from such big groups may join here so I added it to the list with the best. We are not all poor orphan children.  |
| Posted by dawg at Dec 15, 2005 2:22:58 PM |
|
Re: CMS (Content Management System) : Accessibility [24/10/05] I just got done looking at QnECMS and they brag (QnECMS is a Content Management System built with accessibility from the ground-up, making it the most standards compliant and accessible CMS on the market.) that they are they most accessible cms but yet there are quite a few of their sites that they have screen shots of that not only fail validation but fail miserably. Scrolling through their screen captures almost all of the sites looked identical, carbon copies. Yeah they had different pictures and colors but they all looked the same. Text pattern looks good for a newcomer. I like the way they handle their style sheets, this ought to make styling fairly simple for someone who is not familiar with their CMS. I have not had a chance to play with Textpattern but looks promising. Typo 3, too much of a resource hog, I would not use it. |
|
|
Current timezone is GMT May 21, 2013 12:01:23 PM |