CIPA 2003 XIX th International Symposium, 30 September - 04 October, 2003, Antalya, Turkey 
114 
INPUT 
As you can see in Figure 1 the content lifecycle has different 
stages. After writing the article and the check by the chief 
author the article goes online. Because nothing is forever after a 
period of time the article has to move into the archive and is 
substituted by a newer release. Sometimes we like to get 
information of latest and past articles or data. Thus we need a 
method to search and research for this kind of data. 
By using the classic methods of hand written HTML Code you 
have to do the whole lifecycle on your own. This means you 
have to write, format and layout the article. You have to check 
the article. You have to place it into the system and create the 
right navigation. After a while you have to move the article into 
the archive and bring up the corresponding link (don’t forget to 
delete the old one this will result in blind links!) and you have 
to program a search function. All this means that you have to be 
very familiar with techniques like HTML and web 
programming. For a website with a few users and a few pages 
this might be an efficient way, but when you plan to keep a 
website of a community up to date this will result in great waste 
of time and often in less professional presentations 2 . 
To show up the waste of time just imagine how long it takes to 
place an article into the website the “handmade” way. The 
process often looks like this: Rearrange and format a Word 
Document. Prepare the images or other elements for the web. 
Transfer all to the website server, generate the links. Then 
message from the author, please correct this part in the text or 
substitute this image by that one. And so on. 
To avoid this the use of a CMS is the first step in the right 
direction. As discussed above all the necessary formatting and 
coordinating things will be done by the system. Thus the author 
can concentrate on what he wants to publish. Because the 
systems generates his article he don’t have to worry about font 
sizes image qualities and the correct navigation. What he needs 
is a “login” and a basic knowledge of the functions to place 
content into the system, that is all. Because he can not break 
down the layout and the style of the website we get a way of 
“community identity” which is very important for the usability 
of the visitor’s point of view. Furthermore the webmaster of the 
website can concentrate on “webmaster stuff’ and not on 
placing badly prepared articles into the system. Last but not 
least, when the author likes to change something on his article 
he just logs in and change it. That’s all. 
2 This doesn’t mean that all “handmade” community sites 
present a bad style. 
So, when the authors uses the CMS in that way, we get an 
website with up to date content and because of this with high 
interest levels for the visitors. Furthermore we are able to offer 
the visitors some services like a search function, an indexed 
search, downloads, print versions of the articles or text based 
versions of the articles. All this is possible without the work of 
the author. The system will automatically prepare the content in 
the appropriate manner. The visitors get the information they 
look for in the format they like and thus the website becomes 
more and more popular. 
So, what are possible arguments against the use of a CMS and 
which CMS is the right one? 
1.3 Further aspects 
The market for CMS is a rapid growing one. Nearly for every 
purpose you find a CMS solution on the market. In the context 
of the CIPA and other primarily non-commercial Communities 
the costs for the software license is an important point to figure 
out the right CMS. By using a software which is available under 
“General Public License” (GPL) it is possible to use the benefits 
of a CMS in a cheap way. So the price of the software itself 
could not be the argument to deny the usage of such a system. 
Furthermore it is important to check out the system 
requirements on the hosting server the software needs to 
function in a correct manner. CM-Systems which run under 
different circumstances from the view of the hosting server are a 
good choice, because you can select the provider by 
performance, independent from the operating system of the 
server. 
Last but not least we have to keep in mind, that the chosen 
system sometimes needs some extra modules or components 
which should be also available under GPL and that there is an 
engaged community to bring on the software by fixing bugs and 
offer further information or documentation to the CMS. 
To bring the website, managed by a CMS, to success, we have 
to look if there are limitations by using such a system. First of 
all there might be technical limitations. This means the systems 
doesn’t offer the functionality we need or the system requires 
resources we can’t offer. If there is a lack of functionality, we 
have to check if it is possible to easily adapt the system to 
requirements we need. Because we’re using a GPL CMS it is 
more or less easy to build up or to adapt the functionality. 
In most cases problems raises up because of the resources which 
are needed to run the system. But they can be easily solved. For 
example by choosing an adequate provider. More important is 
the compatibility of the system’s interface and the website the 
system generates. 
Whether we like it or we don’t like it: Most users uses the 
Microsoft™ Internet Explorer Version 5 or higher. Nevertheless 
there are also users browsing the web with Netscape™ or 
Mozilla™ or other products. Thus we have to check out which 
techniques the users of the CMS and which techniques the 
visitors prefer. According to this there might be some 
limitations by using the interface to put stuff into the CMS or in 
the layout of the website as it appears on the PC of the visitor. 
To avoid tremendous incompatibilities according to the 
preferred browser, we have to choose a design which will fit to 
the n 
get i: 
statis 
1.4 
As d 
them 
or an 
uses 
the u 
to ha 
feels 
will 
inter! 
Beca 
must 
optio 
set u 
admi: 
chan; 
group 
CMS 
2.1 
In th< 
out tl 
Whili 
empl< 
progr 
comn 
coord 
put al 
web < 
caller 
layou 
Thus 
click 
So, v 
look i 
First 
comn 
organ 
sectic 
the u: 
navig 
whicl 
To ac 
her st 
visito