In the previous post about Joomla, I listed some extensions that address the category limitation issue. However, installing third party extensions runs into the issue of updating your original CMS software. Before you decide to expose your Joomla site to the Update Dislocation Blues, you might want to look at the upcoming 1.6 release.

http://developer.joomla.org/coordinator-blog/304-joomla-16-alpha-2-released.html

New improvements/features since alpha 1 include:

• ACL: access management for global permissions as well as content item specific permissions, variable usergroups, users member of more than one usergroup, permissions are inherited, really fast
• Extendable user profile, profile view in frontend, extendable user parameters
• Tableless com_content layouts
• Improved com_content modules (mod_articles_archive, mod_articles_latest, mod_articles_popular)
• Article linker plugin for editors

Other Joomla 1.6 improvements that existed in alpha 1:

• * Nested Categories and category parameters
• New views in frontend: categories, category

If your Joomla site was extensive enough to run into the category limitation issues, then before you try to marry Joomla to K2 or one of the other programs, it might be worth the effort to download the 1.6 alpha and try it out to see if it will address your issues. It does require a test site with PHP 5.2, and while the update is not ready for production, if the new version improvements will keep your site within the Joomla core, it might be worth waiting for it.

If you use Joomla, you are familiar with some of it’s benefits, and short comings. The built in banner mechanism supports banner rotation (useful if you wish to attract advertisers), and the user/contact manager, while not as deep /flexible as some of the other CMS, is relatively simple and has several levels of control. and the end user interface seems relatively simple. Among the designer drawbacks, has been the necessity to delve into the core to alter some of the layout, and the section/category limitations.

The category issue has been addressed by a large number of extension and programs which list some form of unlimited levels, nested, or many to many categories as part of their features.

Joomla-knowledgebase.com
mightyextensions.com
www.vistamedia.fr
Accordian Menu for virtuemart
joomanager.com
K2

There are other extensions and other ways to add category depth, and the links above are not an inclusive list or recommendation, merely a starting point.

However, if you sure one of these programs, remember that open source (Joomla, WP, Drupal) CMS cores are constantly in flux. When an outside extensions or custom interfaces are used to modify the main CMS software, when it is time to update, there is a chance that the extension based modifications will fail. You have to hope that the extension maker has updated his software to accommodate the CMS update, or that there are no CMS structural changes that break the hooks used to make the two pieces of coding work together.

If you work within the core components, the upgrades usually let your site survive without major revisions. To my mind, that makes a single db, with a single install & ability to upgrade better than heavily altered cores with custom extensions.

Before you create custom interfaces, install third party hacks, or pay for custom coding, check out what is being developed by your core CMS. The major open source programs are supported by large and active developer bases, while most extensions are the work of one or two people. Unless the extension has a long track record, and is dedicated to working with the CMS, you are
risking the Update Dislocation Blues.

If you happen to be a Yahoo customer who is trying to use Sitebuilder, there are some important issues to remember.

1) Make your page titles unique, even if it means you use “site name: page name”. Having all the pages titled “site name” is confusing and deprives search engines of important information.

2) Remember to put in both a description meta and a keywords meta. Some search engines use keywords, but Google doesn’t.

3) Make your keywords specific to the page. It’s ok to include a couple of the general site keywords, but if you are editing a photo page, include keywords that help define the content of the page; mountain photos, lake photos, kitten snapshots, candid photos, wedding photos, whatever is on that page.

You may be using a template, but you need to take care of the meta details.

To read more, jump to the drupal posts.
http://www.jbelldesigns.com/drupal/?q=node/9

Although CMS offer their users the advantage of web based editing interfaces, it turns out they also have drawbacks. The average open-source CMS has multiple editors and contributors, each intent on developing their own section of the code. While this results in robust development and testing, it also results in a constant state of churn as new features are added, old bugs eliminated, and the core code changes.

If the user has their Word Press, or Joomla, Drupal or Blogger hosted in their own site, they had better hope that the ISP offers Fantastico, or some other ISP wide way to update the CMS. Otherwise, they will need to keep their code updated by downloading new versions as they are posted, and migrating the old posts.

For some minor version updates, updates aren’t usually a problem, but when the new version of the code rearranges entire modules, changes the location of various functions, renames folders, and eliminates other sections, it can cause both loss of content, and css problems.

If you are looking for ease of administration, be aware that CMS either require an environment that eases the burden of code updates, or requires that the site owner have the ability to recognize and deal with the version changes.

The initial Wordpress installs were basic, but clean and simple to use. They were an open source alternative to “open” systems that had opted to start charging fairly steep prices for the convenience of on-line blogs.

Since then, there have been many, many revisions. Even so, most of the revised code retained the backwards compatibility, the clean menus, the ease of installation, and the overall ease of use of the original.

Themes became easier, WYSIWYG editing improved, plug-ins added capabilities, and there was a sense that the system would actually work for novice users. You could install it for a client with the assurance that Word Press itself would not violate the trust that you put in its core values.

However, starting in late 2007- early 2008, they changed some of the core. They rearranged the file structures, reformatted menus (not once, but twice), disrupted backwards compatibility, and broke many of the old plug-ins and themes. The new installation process didn’t provide a simple way to repair old installations, the upload tool had difficulty in some browsers.

Even when old installations were updated and the “new” update system and upload tool were disabled, so former versions that had worked could be used, the sweeping changes in the interface were daunting to the clients who had signed on for the original tool.

Undoubtedly there were valid reasons that the file structure was changed. And without a doubt there have been improvements and extensions of the capabilities offered to users.
However, the appeal of the tool was its clean ease of use, and the feeling that whatever changes were made, the creators of Word Press would take care of the people who used it. They would value the intuitive clean interface, and make sure that updates to the code were painless and transparent to end users.

In any case, those clients who have had it installed are frustrated by the changes, which have become so complicated that they can no longer count on being able to update their site themselves.

I expect any day to hear that Word Press is no longer open source, that they are charging for it, or that they are monetizing it by licensing it to turn-key web sites who offer the public crippled versions of Word Press limited to cookie cutter theme and color choices. When that happens, the “clean, easy and reliable” niche that once belonged to Word Press may have an opening for some tool which honors the original concepts that made Word Press so attractive.

plus ça change, plus c’est la même

This is an example of Word Press, installed to function as a blog / with a plug-in that give it some of the functions of a content management system.

Word Press is only one of a large range of available systems, but whereas Moveable Type charges for multiple user installations, Word Press is open source and free to down-load. The developers request a donation, but trust that if you are using for any significant benefit, you will recognize that their efforts make it possible for free.

It arrives with three alternative “themes”, but multiple skins and plug-ins available, making it very versatile. There are some limitations. As of yet, it doesn’t seem to ship with an automatic “excerpt” function, the type of code that pulls in a few words from recent posts. There are some separate plug-in downloads available that say they do the job, but I’ve also read some bug reports that seem to indicate it might be better to use the built in copy and paste for excerpts.