Comments on: Web CMS’s Dissected

By: NoSQL and CMS – Requirements for Content Production Systems « The CMS Curmudgeon

Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:48:36 +0000

[...] Content Production System (CPS) has a number of requirements that are relevant to NoSQL solutions. These [...]

By: NoSQL and CMS – Comparing NoSQL with CPS Requirements « The CMS Curmudgeon

Sun, 11 Jul 2010 22:07:42 +0000

[...] up I’ll be reviewing the repository-level requirements for Presentation Management CMSes, and we’ll repeat this comparison process to see how NoSQL technologies stack up against that [...]

By: NoSQL and CMS – a Match made in Heaven? « The CMS Curmudgeon

NoSQL and CMS – a Match made in Heaven? « The CMS Curmudgeon — Sun, 04 Jul 2010 22:52:33 +0000

[...] seemingly narrow confines of WCM, we’re discussing (at least!) two different problem domains (Content Production Systems and Presentation Management Systems) that have markedly different requirements (and are arguably unrelated), and I’ll discuss the [...]

By: Bottom 10 Predictions for 2010 « The Content Curmudgeon

Bottom 10 Predictions for 2010 « The Content Curmudgeon — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 06:32:44 +0000

[...] be misidentified as a single commoditised use case – an issue that has been beaten to death in the past, but still has no remedy in [...]

By: A new year, a new blog « The Content Curmudgeon

A new year, a new blog « The Content Curmudgeon — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 23:14:14 +0000

[...] that be a “lurmudgeon”?) over on the Alfresco team blog, I realised that I was covering more than just Alfresco specific topics and decided it was high time to split my general interest in [...]

By: Peter Monks » Blog Archive » The Case for Killing “WCM”

Peter Monks » Blog Archive » The Case for Killing “WCM” — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 18:35:04 +0000

[...] is a specific example of a general pattern I’ve observed for a while now. Jon continues: The problem we have at the moment is that both [...]

By: Visions of Jon: WCM is for Losers | Jon On Tech

Visions of Jon: WCM is for Losers | Jon On Tech — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 08:05:12 +0000

[...] is the delivery framework. These are called Web Publishing Tools (WPT) in NPR’s COPE and Presentation Management Systems (PMS) by Peter Monks. Things like Struts, Spring Web, ASP.NET MVC, Ruby on Rails and many many more are [...]

By: Peter Monks

Peter Monks — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:49:23 +0000

To further add to the acronym soup, an excellent post on NPR’s “COPE” strategy for content management defines the same concepts, but uses the phrase Content Management System (CMS) for CPS, and the phrase Web Publishing Tool (WPT) for PMS.

Perhaps we need a naming standard for the various types of “Content Management System”?

By: Peter Monks

Peter Monks — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 22:53:52 +0000

WYM TMA W/ CMS? IWBAPTAKYAIYSTA!

(with thanks to this ultimate acronym list)

By: Jeff Potts

Jeff Potts — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 22:17:00 +0000

This is a good breakdown, but I kind of groaned when I saw your acronyms. In our conversations with clients we try to use “coupled” for PMS and “de-coupled” for CPS to identify the main difference in the two architectures (the coupling or decoupling of the presentation tier from the repository). I think coupled/decoupled has also been used by others like Tony Byrne over at CMSWatch. Maybe we could do with two less acronyms in the CMS world?