Forum Moderators: mack
On a page level - each page could be viewed in a browser. However on a site level, various problems would creep in.
I think the main thing that mack was getting at, was that a content management system can take away alot of hand coding that would otherwise be neccessary.
When I mentioned that you can develop your site using only a browser when using a CMS perhaps I was understating the task a little.
It is true to say they when you have a CMS set up and running correctly, all you need to do is log in and you can make changes to your site using only your web browser.
A typical CMS will have an admin area. You will log into the admin area using your username and password. Once you are in there you can create and edit pages, alter your navigation and control various other aspects of your website.
You do not need a local server in order to do this, you can simply log into your CMS installation on the internet.
The tricky part is setting up your CMS to look and perform exactly how you want it to. There are many different CMS applications available for free, you can take a look at www.opensourcecms.com for some examples. It is always to your advantage to have some knowledge of html/css and the programming language of your cms when you wish to install and configure your CMS.
Mack.
Apparently your CMS software must be uploaded to your host server? I use Ipswitch FTP software. Does this process become unnecessary with CMS?
But then there appears to be no one dominant CMS system. There seems to be a vast sea of them with a wide range of pros & cons.
I had started out using FrontPage. But I got disgusted with browser problems. When I learned enough html and from reading forums I realized that FP was using an ad hoc variety of code. (Including more code than was needed.) So I switched to NotePad and hand coding.
Today I am about a welterweight in html and cms. I'm in the process of learning php.
I am now experimenting with a resurrected FP (paid for!). It seems that it provides an improvement on notepad but not quite as good as TextPad. But it gives very quick feed back on appearance. (Not entirely the way it will appear in the browser, of course.)
I am started an a website that will grow and grow as long as I work at it. I have a simple design concept that will involve maybe no more than 5 page layouts. I am making a determined effort to set up a complete set of external style sheets. There will be very few decorative graphics but will have a number of organization, flow type and Gantt charts.
I believe that FP will keep track of navigation (with a visual chart display) and it does report broken or missing links along with other problems. I think that may be enough.
In Brett's response he writes about CMS saving a lot of hand coding. I image that at least part of that is coding each and every page with its links (or at least some of them)? Is there other work that might be saved?
Meanwhile I will continue to look into various CMS alternatives and will be monitoring the Content Usage and Management forum.
I appreciate your help and look forward to any other comments or advice you may have.
The massive advantages are...
.You only need to work on the design once
.If you later change your design you simply change the design and it will render for every page you have previously created.
I agree there are many CMS systems out there and there really isn't a one size fits all solution. I would recommend you download and install a lot of them and see what one comes closest to meeting your needs.
Mack.
