Can CMSMS do right sidebar "content modules"?

[Anonymous]

So I've been looking at various OS CMS solutions ranging from Mambo to CMSMS. I like CMSMS in terms of the simplicity, and I think I'd favor it for a smaller site I'm doing if only because I think it will be easier for my content owners to grapple with and use to edit content. However, I have one important question with regards to modular reusable content.

Essentially some of the core pages of my site (about 50 or so of them) will be composed of primary content with page specific right side "related modules". These aux content pieces will essentially be a pool of 30 or so small content pieces plugged into various pages. My question is if CMSMS has the ability to do this without requiring me to literally make 50 individual templates for each of the different pages.

Does CMSMS have any support for a content framework or template that extends beyond the primary content item? Can I create a bunch of "mini-blurbs" and then somehow associate a selection of mini-blurbs with a piece of primary content?

If anyone knows whether this is possible I'd appreciate it. I also saw this entry on the roadmap:

Post 1.0

* Multiple content blocks
* Basic template parser (for multiple content and multiple language)

And figured that maybe what I want is the multiple content blocks?

Thanks,
rt

[Ted]

Actually HTML blobs will probably do what you need. Check out this forum thread: http://forum.cmsmadesimple.org/viewtopi ... html+blobs

[Anonymous]

Yes, I noticed the blobs before and was playing with them. However, it seems like the blobs are really only half of the equation... what I need is a way to associate blobs with content rather than with templates. The reason being that if I have 50 pages, each of which uses a different assortment of 3 of 35 blobs, I'll have to create 50 templates to cover all the scenarios (which kind of sucks).

What I'd like to do is create a template that includes a content component, a right sidebar component, etc., and then create a kind of "content object" that includes a certain number of blobs, a content piece, etc.

Though maybe I'm just trying to create a level of abstraction that isn't a huge deal? Just the idea of having to change 50 template files to make a global change because I have to have 50 templates to accomodate these stupid auxiliary content piece differences sucks... thats the real reason I'd like to kick out the content mgmt part and keep the templates to like, say, 3-4 total for the whole site.

Thanks for the post, any further info anyone has is appreciated.

-rt

[Ted]

Yeah, that would be the multiple content blocks idea, then. Unfortunatly, I needed to make a cutoff on some features in order to push usability and other things that are necessary to get to 1.0. This got cut, unfortunately.

[Anonymous]

ARGH! You're killing me here! Is there any kind of schedule on when this functionality might be added to the CMSMS feature set? I saw it got moved from Marchish to after the 1.0 release... is that a long way off?

Thanks,
rt

[jptechnical]

Yes, I noticed the blobs before and was playing with them. However, it seems like the blobs are really only half of the equation... what I need is a way to associate blobs with content rather than with templates. The reason being that if I have 50 pages, each of which uses a different assortment of 3 of 35 blobs, I'll have to create 50 templates to cover all the scenarios (which kind of sucks).

What I'd like to do is create a template that includes a content component, a right sidebar component, etc., and then create a kind of "content object" that includes a certain number of blobs, a content piece, etc.

Though maybe I'm just trying to create a level of abstraction that isn't a huge deal? Just the idea of having to change 50 template files to make a global change because I have to have 50 templates to accomodate these stupid auxiliary content piece differences sucks... thats the real reason I'd like to kick out the content mgmt part and keep the templates to like, say, 3-4 total for the whole site.

Thanks for the post, any further info anyone has is appreciated.

-rt

html_blobs will do this just fine. you can put them in a content page... you just can't nest the html_blobs.

You can however have as many on a page as you want. I have a template that I am working on for a client that needs several different templates. I use html_blobs like SSIs all the time. The header, top nav, table above the body, left nav, pre-footer and footer are all called on the same page. This makes the template super simple to duplicate everywhere with just the feature you want. Then the content page has right additional content links, center page advertisement banner and left side additional links. Again these are all pulled from html_blobs.

here is an example of 2 html blobs in a single content page. http://www.jptechnical.com/contact-us.shtml

Here is the code:

Code: Select all

{html_blob name="blob_1"}
{html_blob name="blob_2"}

[Anonymous]

It isn't the more than one blob in a pagve that concerns me, but you do make an interesting point with the method of using the content page to house the local or unique page instance code as well as content.

However, the problem with that approach is that it eliminates one of the key benefits of using a CMS; separating content from presentation, and making content pages so simple that non-technical editors can go in and modify or create new pages.

If I did this I'd have to have blob code and the structural code to support the page layout in each content instance that worked this way. When a user creates a new page he or she would have to know the framework/layout, coopy in or write the proper elements using HTML and the CMSMS meta tags, etc.

I need to provide a simple way for non-techs to manage the site, and unfrotaunetly this workaround directly undermines the greatest value a CMS provides me.

The only way this would work as I'd like would be if I can use the content system as the middle framework I talked about earlier. What I mean is if I could do a double step in the content area by nesting a content include inside a content page, thus using two content pages instead of one and making the first page more of a framework page. However, I don't know what would happen with regards to all the tertiary data (which title would win?) or if this is even possible (would teh second content include even get called?).

Thanks for the ideas.

Best,
Rick

[jptechnical]

I need to provide a simple way for non-techs to manage the site, and unfrotaunetly this workaround directly undermines the greatest value a CMS provides me.

The way I have handled this is I make a non-active content page with the layout elements I need. Then I instruct the user to go to the page they want to base their new content item on, copy the content page, make the new content item and paste the structure and change as neccessary.

I know it isn't as simple as you would like but it works. In reality, how often is ANY new content page made from scratch. I would say not as often as you think. Givent the choice of starting from scratch or copying a layout and changing to fit, most would choose the latter.

True, it would be good if CMS had the features you desire. However, the spirit of CMSMS is the 'Made Simple' part. There are other CMSs out there that have these feature, but they are no where as easy to use as CMSMS. You will find, as I did, that the CMSs with the most features are often the most difficult to operate and maintain. CMSMS at the moment is the best combination of features and ease of use. It IS the CMS I would PUT MY PARENTS ON.

Please don't take my replies as rude, I have been your situation and have spent alot of time looking for the complicated way to get a simple job done.

I think we will see some more flexibility in the Content areas in CMSMS in coming versions. If CMSMS can't do what you need now... check back later.

[Akrabat]

Talking to wishy on IRC, I can see how this could be supported without too many headaches. (He says hopefully!)

If I get some time in the next week or so, I'll have a go at implementing something.

[Anonymous]

jptechnical:

No worries on the response, no rudeness detected or assumed. I'm most interested in getting all available data/input about CMSMS at this point anyway, and your post makes a number of good points.

To that point I researched simple OS CMSs for clients a few years back and was dismayed at the complexity of the offerings. Basically open source CMS was, at that point, a collection of remedial scripts or convoluted template/file/highly technical and unstable implementations. The development of implementations like CMSMS has really brightened my outlook on whats currently available and in the pipeline.

I would also definitely place CMSMS near the top of the heap from the review I've conducted over the last few weeks. The two routes I'm pursuing are a CMSMS approach and a Mamboesque approach, and as a semi-technical semi-php literate IA with a lot of client side dev experience I would state that the template system and general complexity of ez Publish, Mambo, Typo3, etc. has me leaning towards the CMSMS route. They dop provide total control, but at a cost both I and my non-technical users don't want to bear (christ, even I was overwhelmed when I logged into Mambo, and I know what I'm doing!).

Again, thanks for all the input and ideas, I appreciate it.


Akrabat:

You warm my heart... While the lack of a middle framework isn't a make or break, it would obviously simplify matters greatly (as I've whined about in teh above thread enough already). I'll look forward to following developments and seeing if anything happens in the near future. I definitely think this would bump CMSMS straight to the top by given it the robustness to match its great simplicity and existing functionality.

Thanks for the posts all.

Best,
Rick

[jah]

I think the discussion going on here is very interesting.
I have been thinking about a related issue, that I think would make CMS really simple an powerful.

The way it is today, a Content provider that do not understand the tag system cannot insert tags in the content. This is a bit confusing because, I'm sure the same Content provider can create a HTML blob, but he/she cannot use it in a page.

What I would like to see is some kind of selection box anywhere in a content page where the user could select a tag in the system for insertion (The selection should be form based of-course. Tag parameters could also be selected easily from here).

I know this is not simple because it involves also the WYSIWYG editor and the tags are probably intended first of all for the templates, but it is an interesting scenario