Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I just got done reading this thread...
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/588888/best-cms-for-a-corporate-web-presence
Which was the closest thing I could find on the web. I too am looking to redesign a website for a corporation. I am the marketing director, not a developer.
I have researched this subject in many places. I won't say everywhere. I have read:
http://sunlightlabs.com/blog/2009/content-management-systems-just-dont-work/ and
http://www.webdesignish.com/the-best-web-development-frameworks.html
and dabbled at www.cmsmatrix.org and www.bestwebframeworks.com under the PHP area. I have read at least a few dozen articles from various places, some of them including the providers websites or forums.
I have read nearly as much as I can in the time I gave myself.. so with a little knowledge on all these areas I want to reach out to a community that has more experience.
Background: Manufacturer website, one location, no branches. One marketing/IT guy. Utilizes dreamweaver for all web editing needs. Knows ultra-basic html only for text and image placement and editing. I need to be pointed in the direction of a cost-effective design solution with either a framework or combination thereof, or a CMS that can give me what I need. The best example of what I want the site to look like would be a cross between tripplite dot com and logitech dot com, with some elements from a site like sonicwall dot com. I need an animated menu system but with images, so size customization is necessary. Simple animations for rollovers and click reactions so that users can tell when they have selected something. Page content does not change often, with most edits being to PDF documents. At present, I name all major documents (such as a 2011 catalog) with the same filename, and simply replace the document with the latest version via FTP. Nearly every other page will be a static page with static text and images. I might request polish on all other pages after the development is complete. Our site might end up being somewhere around 50 pages after this redesign.
It has been suggested to me to have the site designed in Wordpress by a pro, but everything I HAD read before reading the first-mentioned thread posted here said that I shouldnt use it because of content and bug issues. I believe that wordpress can provide a robust and feature rich corporate website that isn't just another blog or news site... I have seen a few examples like networksolutions dot com.
Project 1 is a redesign and new look. Project 2-9 goes through a parts library with thumbnails, build-to-quote system similar to a shopping cart but with no payments (and no PCI compliance), an e-page flip type catalog revision, and login portals with per user/entity content such as order history, order documentation/records and open-order production status and shipping information. We want it all. But where to go?
I have so far looked at for a CMS:
Wordpress, Drupal, Radiant CMS, concrete5 (and spoke with Franz a tad), and synType CMS.
To go the framework route with PHP:
yii, codeigniter, akelos, symfony, prado, cakephp and solarphp
The other ones I have heard many developers praising were jquery, dojo and django but im not sure yet if they are utilized in any other solutions that I listed.
Tomorrow I will be going through the definitions and such at bestwebframeworks to better learn about the once I had chosen and pit them against one another.
I would really appreciate any help in evaluating which platform would best suit me based on the information that I have provided above. Feel free to ask any other questions that may help narrow the list.
Thank you all in advance.
Before determining how to proceed, you need to as a few important questions -
Is your company in business to make money?
Do you ever expect potential customers to view your website?
Are you a trained designer with experience in usability and best practices?
Can you write maintainable, scalable, and standards compliant code?
Chances are, you should seriously consider hiring a professional for the job. A business website is often the first point of contact with a potential client and first impressions are hard to fix. If your site looks like your 8th grade nephew designed it with a full plate of mystery meat navigation and cross browser compatibility issues, you are likely going to lose clients before you even get a chance to talk to them.
There are likely a multitude of additional features and functions that your website could perform if you knew about them. A reputable professional would be able to assess the needs of your business and recommend website functionality to match. As they say, you don't know what you don't know.
My recommendation would be to beg and plead for a budget to get a website built by someone who knows what they are doing. A well built website will have tremendous ROI and pay for itself easily.
It looks like your needs are primarily front-end, I would recommend a JavaScript framework, like ExtJS or jQuery, I really like ExtJS. Then you could pair it up with some kind of python, ruby, php CMS back-end. Right now I am developing my website www.coffeedig.com (currently still in development) in ExtJS with a Django back-end. I picked ExtJS cause I have a lot of experience in it. I picked Django even though I had very little experience in python but python seemed like the best language to me. I all depends on your needs and your developers skills/experience though. Locally at my work we have about 3 to 1 ratio of developers to architects. It takes a lot of time to maintain and develop a CMS from scratch. So I would recommended against that. I wish I knew more on how large your development team was but personally I would give them a list and have them try the frameworks out and see what feels right to them. Also documentation and community support are two very important things.
Oh. I can see from your post your are trying hard to find a proper solution for your needs.
Since you will probably not be implementing / deploying the solution yourself, I can assure you that whatever option you choose, it is the developpers putting together the project that will make the difference. You can have competent developpers on your team, but if they have to use a tool they are not familiar with, the result may be deceiving.
The choice you need to make from what I read in your post is if you want to use a framework, where developpers will be implementing from the ground-up, or using a pre-built application ready made for content management (CMS) that can be tailored to your needs.
All the popular languages offer a multitude of frameworks that have all been tried and tested.
PHP has Zend Framework, Drupal, Symfony, and many, many more.
Python has Rails, Zope, Pylon, Django, etc.
All these could be viable choices, the main question is still, do you need an application with specific needs and business processes integrated that would be better suited with a framework to ease develppment, or do you simply need to have an easy way to show your products online and have an easy way to create and organise content? I suggest you not re-invent the wheel, if your needs are just for regular web-publishing, a content management system would reduce your costs.
Look around and search for demos of the solutions your are interested in, test-drive before you make a choice. And be sure to have a competent ressource available for the solution you choose, because in the end it is the developping teams competence with the product that will dictate the success of the result.
By the way, JQuery is a great library but is not what you are looking for, chances are it will be integrated in whatever platform / framework you choose! :)
My 2 cents, good-luck!
Frankly, it sounds to me that you have a mostly static website, with occasional PDF updates.
At the same time it doesn't sound like you have the skills to craft your web site by hand.
You also seem to have some familiarity with Dreamweaver, which a pretty scary powerful piece of software.
If it were me, I'd hire a solid Dreamweaver web designer that simply leverages DW for your site, and basically keep it static. With enough CSS and possibly JS work, the pages will remain static pages, and if you need to do minor updates, you're likely capable enough to do that on your own. Then simply sync up the site from your local copy.
The advantage of this is simplicity. Simplicity for you, simplicity for possibly future contractors, etc. If you're not planning on a lot of "interactive" features that require server side support, then keeping the site as static and simple as practical is a smart move.
Uploading a PDF takes simple training, not a CMS. And Dreamweaver should be more than capable front end to manage much of that for you.
Addenda:
I understand about your future plans, but those later phases are night and day beyond Phase 1. This first phase, this cosmetic and functional redesign, is essentially a marketing and branding phase. The skill set needed to implement it is quite different from Phases 2-9.
You can talk with your front end designer about the later phases, in terms of overall presentation, but the person implementing your front end will likely be quite different from the person implementing the back end.
Once you have finished with the Phase 1, the back end integration will be able to leverage the assets created when developing the later phases. None of this initial work will be "wasted". But you have the benefit of being able to move forward with your current toolset and releasing it early, while Phase 2+ are spec'd, developed, tested, and later deployed.
A CMS toolset, at this point in the process, is really a distraction.
In the end, the choice of toolset is really secondary to the person or team that you select to complete the other phases. It is good to be aware of the tool market, and the choices and their assorted advantages/disadvantages, but in the end what is going to matter most is the user interface that you as de facto maintainer are going to be interacting with day by day, and the ongoing maintenance of this system.
If you were buying a delivery truck, you no doubt would be selecting one based on a combination of how it fits your needs and overall cost of ownership versus shopping around to dealers "You know, I really like Volvos". You'll likely not care so much about how the engine works, or the truck is designed. As long as it starts and turns and stops like it's supposed to, with the costs you expected to pay, you'd likely be happy with it.
If you have a favorite, then fine. Likely whatever you pick isn't going to matter much in the end, assuming it's reasonably mainstream. If you don't have a favorite, then it's not particularly important. And if you don't have a favorite, it's not important at all for Phase 1.
But like a truck, it's more important to have a good mechanic. If you have a mechanic that likes Fords and is well experienced with them, you might want to seriously look at a Ford. Trucks are easy to find. Good mechanics, not so much.
Right now, Phase 1, it's about layout, color, and image. Things mechanics and programmers are notoriously bad at. Get this done now, with the right people, using tools you know since you have to support it short to mid-term.
Then look for some good people you trust to work with on the backend. They can use what you have done in Phase 1, and make it work with whatever tools they'll be using to do what, in the end, is most important to you.
Check out silverstripe, an amazing CMS probably better than most, most people just don't know about it. Amazingly easy to template and super easy to extend. It's also very powerful like unto Drupal. http://www.silverstripe.org/
Update:
Sorry guys didn't mean to make it seem like an ad. And no I am not affiliated with silverstripe I just really like it.
Related
TL;DR:
Boss needs site up and running yesterday. BackEndGuy1 uses zend framework 2 and is going way too slow. BackEndGuy2 (this is me) was hired to help BackEndGuy1 meet deadline. FrontEndGuy and BackEndGuy2 decide that using Zend will take forever, so they want to switch to an easier framework or a CMS. What should they choose? Expression Engine? Codeigniter? Concrete5? Something else?
A friend of mine and I have a major decision problem. We’re working on a site that has to be up and running as soon as possible. My friend works on the front end along with an artist, and I work on the back end along with another guy. Actually, I was only recently hired because the boss and the rest of the team decided that the other back end guy needed a speed boost. That other guy thought that using zend framework 2 for this job was a good idea. As a result, I’ve spent the last couple of weeks trying to learn zf2 (which is very hard to do, believe me) and doing php and javascript patchwork on existing code. Plus, I have the boss frequently hovering over my head and asking “What do you think? Are we going to be up before Christmas?”, to which I try to respond in a diplomatic way like “Anything is possible with hard work and determination!”, but my honest opinion is “Sorry, this is impossible. At this rate it’ll probably take a month or two…”.
Bearing in mind that (a) the other back end guy practically stopped working on the site after I was hired (we only talk on the phone when I need him to explain parts of his code) and (b) there is still a considerable amount of work to be done on the back end, my friend and I decided that a switch to a different tool will probably give us the boost we need. I’ll try to give a brief but comprehensive description of what we are trying to build, and I’d like you to help us find the best option we have.
Ok, so the site we’re building will be a place where people will publish *candies* for sale and other people will browse published *candies*, and if they find one they like, they will be able to contact the publisher. It is important to note that no transactions will take place over the site. We will only provide a means for publishers to show off their product and customers to contact the publishers. Roughly, the pages / functionality we need are:
home page
*candy* search based on *candy* properties (with pagination, filtering, sorting… etc)
individual *candy* page (as viewed by publisher (editable) and customer)
publisher page with contact info and product list (as viewed by publisher (editable) and customer)
login and registration functionality for publishers
maybe some static helper pages I forgot to mention
Now, many of them are already working (e.g. the search page, with all the desired features, is ready), but there are many things left that have to be done using zf2 and I have no idea how to do them…
What we need now is something that (1) is easy to pick up, (2) is fast to create stuff with and (3) has as much out-of-the-box functionality as possible. My friend (the front end guy) is leaning towards Expression Engine (money is not a problem), because being it a CMS he will be more comfortable with it too, and also because he noticed that we will be needing a lot of its built-in features.
His only concern is that it may not be as customizable as a framework. The framework solution we are considering is Codeigniter, as it fulfills criteria (1) and (2). Another option I am considering is Concrete5. I just watched a couple of introductory videos and I was amazed by the in-place page editing functionality and the block system they use to dynamically add content to pages.
What is your advice? What would you do in our position?
There is quite a big difference between a CMS and a framework. I think you should make that main decision first, before going to details like which one is better.
Also, using a different tool might get you up to speed, but the fact that you need to ask, suggests that you are not very experienced in those other tools as well. Other tools also have a learning curve, even the easy ones, and besides, you will have to start over completely, not being able to take along the work that is already finished.
So I would recommend to stick with zf for now. If you are going to make a switch, maybe Drupal or even a CMS like WordPress would be better and easier. Also, I think it is important to tell the boss what the status is and what problems you have. You can then decide on the best strategy, and let the boss define the most important features, so there will be at least something if not everything before Christmas. Better to have some functionalities working and being usable than having nothing at all.
If you're going to be doing all the work, then switch to a framework or CMS that you already know.
If you don't know any, either stay with Zend & take whatever time it takes (making it clear to the boss what's happening), or get out now.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Been doing a lot of Php & MySQL programming over the past 3 or 4 years. I really enjoy it, and all its related back-end technology.
I'm mostly doing freelance work here and there, but I am not a design guy, and really don't enjoy tinkering with CSS trying to make it work :)
My question is, is it ok to just be good at the server-side end of things, and outsource / team up with a good CSS person? How about in the context of things like Wordpress, Drupal, Cake, etc? Do people expect they're you to setup all their Wordpress functionality, and implement their Photoshop files into designs as well?
I really speaking from a freelance point of view, and not so much working in a major company with tons of programmers / designers.
The very best designers aren't usually the very best developers, or vice-versa. It seems like you would benefit from finding a good partner who excels in design to complement your focus on back-end programming. No need to hide that from those who hire you.
However, even if you're not great with making things look pretty, you should probably be familiar with the code the designers use to make things look pretty. It comes in handy, and you'll at least be able to construct basic designs for prototyping, and eventually reasonably clean, solid designs for final products. And, if a basic change in an existing layout is needed, you won't be afraid to make it yourself. It's a skill set worth building.
The key for me has been finding a frontend or backend person who has a general enough understanding of the other side works so that you can coordinate enough for him to say
"Ok if we want this element to look like this I need your php function to generate a with a unique id etc. My most successful projects have been with developers who specialize in a certain thing but still maintain general knowledge of all the different aspects that go into a project.
From my experience, doing "freelance website work" means you end up doing all of the work on your own, but don't get me wrong, building a website these days is extremely easy in most cases and I would suggest you learn CSS if that is what you want to continue doing. Web applications are a different story.
From a freelance perspective, it depends on how much you're willing to to spend outsourcing to your css/design person. A client is only going to be willing to spend X on the project, it doesn't matter to them how it gets done (or shouldn't). So as long as you don't mind slicing off a percentage of X to pay the designer, that should be fine. Especially if it's not going to be a client you maintain sites for.
Having said that, though, if it's a customer you're going to have to maintain and make changes over time, you're going to really want a background in the design aspect. At least enough to make minimal changes. A complete redesign will probably require outsourcing again.
This is approximately the model I've set up. I'm absolutely horrible with photoshop/graphic creation, but the html + css aspect is not hard.
I had an internship that I mainly did back-end work and the little front-end work was the minutae of moving elements pixel by pixel. That gave me a strong distaste for front-end work. But I am in a similar situation as I've primarily been a back-end person and am now transitioning to more front-end work.
My advice would be to get comfortable enough with CSS and the blog/cms frameworks so that you can tweak them and make small modifications. If a client comes to you and starts saying how they want the front-end to look and you have a blank look on your face or are unable to give a reasonable estimation of how much time it will take to implement the updates (or if it's even possible) that will be a big dissuading factor in their eyes.
Don't be afraid of getting deeper into front-end design as well, it improves your marketability not having to rely on others for a portion of the project.
From my personal experience, heightening you experience in the basics of front-end develop will benefit you for more than one reason. Sometimes the best way to deliver a usable front-end requires specialty programming on the back-end. If you can except what will be happening on the front-end, or even developing the barebones of it yourself, that will help greatly.
You might be asking yourself, "Okay, that doesn't really answer my question?" but in fact it does. It's Web 2.0+ out there... clients expect beautiful, dynamic, and easy-to-use websites. This often requires the use of JavaScript and how it interacts with your server scripts and the CSS, layout, and design of the page.
So, in short, if you're wanting to do freelance stuff, in my opinion, it would be worth your while to expand your horizons. I honestly think the gap between "Web Developer" and "Web Designer" has been slowly closes over the years.
Personally, I work for the computer support department of a state University and all the websites we do are both written and designed by myself without any "outsourcing" of my work. I can do what I need, I can make changes on the fly without waiting for another person to do, and I can test immediately. All three are huge advantages in our environment.
One aspect I wanted to direct your attention to is the choice of your development framework. If your framework supports MVC (model-view-controller) separation, then it's very natural for a developer to work on the M and the C, while the designer (CSS/HTML professional) works on the V component. This creates a great workflow and a good separation of responsibilities - and you can work on two separate files at the same time! They're on HTML peppered with some tags, you're on the logic.
I currently work in an agency and have been considering trying to branch out on my own. In my current setup, whenever I interact with a client, it's at the later stage after they've hired us and after someone from sales did all the front work with them. I suspect it's very different for developers who deal with clients directly.
My question is how much explanation and training do you have give to clients before they're on the same page with you? How often for example do you find that clients don't understand the concept of a content management system? What other similar "basics" have you found that they don't understand?
They might not know the buzzwords, but they understand what they want and (usually) what they want to do. It is nice to use terms so you and the client can communicate easier, but don't beat them over the head with terminology.
They don't want a "CMS" they want the ability to add/edit/delete pages in a simple UI and have them displayed in the same style as the rest of their site.
Communication is getting ideas and concepts across, not necessarily "educating" your clients.
There is no definite answer to that. Clients differ. Some have more affinity for and experience with technical things and jargon and some dont. Some dig buzzwords, some prefer plain english. You have to adapt to the individual client. The most important thing is finding out together what they really need - not what they think they need. Or As Henry Ford put it:
"If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses."
One of the biggest misconceptions I have come around regarding CMS is clients tend to underestimate the effort they have to put into it once they have it. They think (or have been told) a CMS is easy and cheap: you can update your content yourself and you dont have to pay the expensive agency to update your site anymore. Sounds brilliant, but it's a myth.
Clients have to understand that Content Management is a process that requires a lot of work. It's not just some technical thingie you install. That's only the smallest part. It also takes time to know the CMS and it takes practise. Use it or lose it. A CMS has to be used by someone and those people have to understand the aims of the website. They have to have a skillset in editing and writing and - if you allow extensive designing - design. Otherwise, the CMS a) wont be used and/or b) will contain poor content and/or c) look like crap.
Despite being six years old and published on April 1st, I find most of the arguments in Why Content Management Fails still very valid and good to consider when working with clients who want a CMS.
I have worked on both sides, with clients as the resident coding troll and with software shops as one of the programming grunts. And on most jobs the whole engagement is often reduced to the software shop trying to sell a product, do some cursory customization, and then get out as soon as possible. And I don't blame them. I often found that clients:
Didn't know that that content on the web can be copied and pasted.
Thought that a product, i.e. the CMS system itself, can somehow divine content on its own.
Were convinced that the whole process is either an IT problem or the consultant's problem, i.e. they will ask you to keep the content updated for them.
That is to say that most clients will have an intuitive understanding of what a CMS can offer them, but they won't fully realize what it will require of them.
If your agency wants to expand into including a CMS as part of your total offering, which seems to be more about design and content as your question implies, I think you can stand to benefit your clients a lot more, particularly if you're up front with them about what they will need to do.
Preamble
To build dynamic web-sites, we have to master at least four languages:
HTML for the structure of web pages
CSS for layout and design
JavaScript for interactivity
A language for business rules or dynamic driven data
In addition, there's SQL for persistent storage, Memcache for sessions and caching, APIs for the many different content management systems. We should also consider interacting with OpenID, Facebook, Twitter, OpenSocial in building a web application, for it to be interesting.
All in all, it's an utter mess!
If you take into account two objectives:
Teaching web development to kids
Staying productive as a team
Question
What high level systems exist that unify HTML + CSS + Javascript + (Insert High Level Language here, PHP preferred)?
Background
I am a software engineer with 15+ years of experience as project lead and developer with technologies like Broadvision, Autonomy, Enterprise Java, and Oracle.
During recent years, I have focused on the developing community websites, using Drupal or PHP frameworks such as CakePHP. I like web development and enjoy the impedance mismatch between the technologies involved. Still the inevitable conclusion I come to is there must be a better way.
I am the father of two sons (13 and 9), and while I don't want them to become programmers I would like them to comprehend computers as more than gaming machines. I like to motivate them to tinker a bit with web development to express themselves.
Whenever I show them bits and pieces, I would love for them to have a toolset that allows them to create "interesting" results in an hour or two on a Sunday afternoon.
GWT goes someway towards being a high level toolkit, letting you write Java to produce Javascript.
"Links is a new programming language designed to make web programming easier. . . Links eases the impedance mismatch problem by providing a single language for all three tiers. The system generates code for each tier; for instance, translating some code into Javascript for the browser, some into a bytecode for the server, and some into SQL for the database."
At first I wasn't going to post this, since it's a research project, not a production system; but all these answers saying "that's how it is, deal with it" begged for a counterexample.
Web programming is an inherently multi-discipline craft.
The primary reason for this is because of seperation of concerns...the reason that HTML and CSS and JavaScript, SQL, etc, are not mashed together in one language is because they each have seperate goals, caveats, pitfalls, and strengths.
Can you imagine trying to debug a site that has SQL, CSS, JavaScript and PHP code mixed together in the same source files? You may have already had the misfortune of doing so. Sadly, there are literally thousands of sites written like this, and it is a complete nightmare trying to debug or add to such messy amalgamations of presentation, data, and structure.
All in all, an utter mess! How is one
supposed to teach web development to
kids?
I think the most important thing is teaching the fundamentals of programming and making them stick. Variables, logic, pointers, memory management, algorithms, data structures, etc.
When you have the fundamentals of programming, it's easy to work in multipe languages, pick up new ones, and easy to change with the times. This is an invaluable skill for something as constantly-evolving and trend-based as web programming.
In my opinion people new to programming should be started at lower level languages, like C for example. People should be tought the intrinsic, fundamental concepts of programming and should gain knowledge of what is going on behind the scenes before even being shown a higher level language like PHP or Python.
I think that this attitude towards teaching programming will have the effect of breeding better web developers as well as providing a barrier of entry that will weed out people that don't have the interest or intelligence. I think the result of this type of attitude will be better developers, better software, and ultimately more powerful languages and tools.
How is one supposed to teach web development to kids?
An army of kids in web development is what has degraded our profession since now just about anyone calls himself a programmer while it's getting harder and harder for us to get distanced from them and get decent pay.
Many languages and technologies to master? It's a good thing. Let there be some entry barrier to join the ranks of developers.
ADDED: By following comments I can see I have not made myself entirely clear. I say nothing about the age, be it 10, 30, 50 or 80. It's all about attitude. Whether a person understands and accepts the fact that there is much more to the profession than moving controls with a mouse in some designer or CMS. There is a lot of knowledge to be gained, including basics of CS, algorithms, data structures, databases, architecture, extensibility, maintenance, performance, scalability, usability, marketing and much more that belong to the workshop of a professional software developer. I a person is ignorant of those and doesn't make a move to educate themselves and strive to become more and more proficient, they do not belong to the profession. And let this opinion be biased.
The closest I think you'll get is .NET. There are many frameworks for many languages, but none that I know of that handle absolutely everything. Beside that you must not attempt to convince children that programming is a walk in the park. It's a difficult career, that requires a lot of study and keeping-up. We work with technologies that are here today, and gone tomorrow.
If you think about it, programming isn't any different than carpentry, or aeronautics. Just about any profession you chose will require you to learn a lot of different things to be better at what you do.
How are you supposed to teach web development to kids? Wow, that's a thorny one. How does one go about teaching them surgery, or intellectual property law, or civil engineering? Or for that matter auto mechanics, or plumbing, or general contracting?
Have you thought about popping in a Sesame Street tape?
Elmo doesn't like it when you trivialize his profession.
Software industry is suffering from unqualified individuals doing nothing but creating poor quality products and at the same time distancing this profession from becoming a true engineering discipline. This isn't something to get certified on. For the love of god, don't 'teach' anyone software development. Explain to them that making great software only comes out as a result of years of experience and wealth of knowledge of past and current technologies. The worst you can do is introduce yet another half-baked developer creating work for others working with them. Tell them to get educated. I know this isn't the answer you probably wanted to hear, but I wanted this to be read.
I think the problem with web development is that it was not originally designed for what it is used today. We build rich client applications inside a browser with HTML+CSS+JavaScript plus whatever serverside technology generates it. Yes, it works, but it's a pain, especially with those annoying browser incompatibilites. The existence of Flash and Silverlight proves this. They let you build your app with one single technology, still inside the browser. The downsides of needing a plugin for your content is obvious though.
The languages are the least of your worries. It's the problem domain that they work with that is complex. Using different languages actually makes things more manageable because a) It makes the boundaries explicit and b) the languages can be optimised for the domain.
Programming (PHP/JS) and document format (HTML/CSS) are 2 different things.
Learning to program in PHP and JS at the same time will also be difficult.
You should focus on HTML and JS on the client at start. You could then let them program javascript on the server as well. This will make it only one programming language, and focus on HTML over CSS to start with.
Once they've learned the basics of JS and HTML, you can teach them a more widely used server side programming language (like PHP, Ruby, etc) and CSS.
Django can take you part of the way through its cleanness. It is focused around productivity. Teaching is not easier than any other language/framework, but look at it this way: when taught this tool, your students are well equipped in their knowledge of how easy it should be. They will never accept Java servelets or similar nightmares after having learnt Django.
Check out Opa: http://opalang.org/
This is an up and coming web development technology. It looks quite promising. I have done a lot of web development over the past couple years and if I had to make a prediction which up and new framework/language/technology is going to be the primary way websites are developed in ~5-10 years I would say it will be Opa.
The documentation is great, the community is great, the tutorials and responsiveness to questions asked of the team working on the project is excellent. Overall they seem to have an attention to detail in regards to developing this new framework that seems to be unmatched.
Many technologies to master is not a good thing. We need a Visual Basic for the web, no matter what the elitists say.
You need different languages for different purposes. In most web applications there's actually quite a bit going on, so you need the different languages and solutions.
If the goal is to unify on a single language, you can do that. You can use Javascript on the server, and then build the pages using document.createElement() and apply styles to them directly to the styles property. And on the server, store your data directly in files with Javascript.
Obviously this wouldn't work out that well. HTML is not perfect, but there is a reason it is so ubiquitous-- it does what it does simply and well. CSS is both convoluted and too simplistic, but the underlying idea of defining overrideable rules to express your design is sound. And SQL may be a pain to understand at times, but expressing database queries this way is expressive and actually works pretty well.
That being said, I'm not saying there is or should be one architecture. There shouldn't be. Each project should use an architecture in line with its requirements.
On your next project try to simplify: do you really need a database? Can you combine the view layers to simplify, either using something like GWT, Applets, Flash or .NET? Do you really need to serve up your content in a browser (which introduces CSS, HTML and Javascript complexities), or can you just write an application?
I think your approach might need to be rethought. Take this for what it is, my opinion, but I would think this ordering might work better.
Top Priorities: (no particular order)
Develop problem solving skills
Be productive as a team
Next:
Basic Programming skills (PHP, Python, etc)
After they know how to solve problems as individuals and as a team they can move onto specifics such as:
Client/Server model
Markup (HTML, XHTML, XML, etc)
Styling (CSS)
Client-side scripting (JavaScript / jQuery)
Server-side scripting (PHP, Ruby, etc)
Build up their knowledge of what's involved piece by piece rather than jumping into the deep end off the bat - they'll be quickly overwhelmed.
At this point you can start to introduce things like file I/O and databases.
This will give them a fairly comprehensive skill-set. From here they can really start learning.
In addition, one may have to deal with SQL for persistent storage, Memcache for sessions and caching, APIs of content management systems, OpenID, Facebook, Twitter, OpenSocial etc. to build anything interesting.
These are whole topics unto themselves, you can't bite them off all in one chunk. Especially if you're taking these people from 0. Before you can build something interesting you have to learn to build something mundane.
HTML5 will probably be more in the vein of what you're looking rather than Flash or Silverlight but it's not quite here yet...Though support is building.
Baby steps, Olav - if this were The Matrix you could download all that info in one shot but we're not there...yet ;-)
For the moment, and near future, web development is the synergy of many different technologies working together to deliver an interesting user experience.
Well, that's my 2 cents
The multi disciplinary nature of web development is one of the things that makes it a joy to work in, especially in a team environment.
To work well as a team, you naturally come together with a group of people with a range of expertise, from UI/graphics people down to DBAs and sys admins. Even within a single layer of the group (for example back end programmers) each person generally specialises in a different set, for example some people may have more experience up towards UI, others down towards data.
I would take this variety any day, compared to working in a room of 10 java programmers all working on some middleware application.
If you simply want to teach them to write dynamic websites, set them going through the HTML tutorial on w3schools.com and once they're done, find yourself a decent looking stylesheet that they can include and set them going with PHP. That'll get them up and running as a hobby, and if they want to do more, they can start piecing together extra knowledge, like CSS and JavaScript.
Ruby on Rails goes quite a way towards unifying all of those, but for CSS it leaves you out in the cold (though there are probably a few frameworks for RoR that make CSS obsolete, but then you have another markup language, I think), and you still need Javascript (though it does write a lot of Javascript for you, and all DB code).
On the other hand, about your kids: programming is for programmers. On a Sunday afternoon to put something together in a few hours, you would need to know a framework, and buy some plugins, and get everything up and moving without much work. Something like Drupal or Joomla, where they sell templates (for Joomla you can buy packs of hundreds) and plugins to do all kinds of things. And when that fails, your kids should probably know how to go on ODesk and drop $100 to get something done on your framework. Learning to programming is good if you want to be a programmer. Otherwise, it's best to learn what you need to hire good programmers or buy good predone components, and have the cash to do it.
Last point about the kids: let them play video games. That is the best training that they can get for whatever the future holds in store on the computer side. Video games let you investigate, play, and relax with the computer. Once you have that, learning HTML, CSS, Javascript, and some application stack is cake.
angularjs could be an option. it is inteded for single-page-applications and runs on a nodejs-stack and does some template-javascript "magic".
example (template/code):
It binds(via auto-generated-client-side-js) the value from the input-field to the the heading(h1).
If you type something to the input field, the text in the heading gets updated.
And you don't have to write the frontend-js.
<input type="text" ng-model="yourName" placeholder="Enter a name here">
<h1>Hello {{yourName}}!</h1>
I'm in the process of designing a PHP-based content management system for personal use and eventually to be distributed. I know there are a lot of CMS's already out there, but I really haven't found one that meets my all of my needs and I also would like to have the learning experience. Security is a large focus, as are extensibility and ease of use. For those of you out there who have built your own CMS, what advice can you offer? What features are essential for a core? What are must have add-ons? What did you wish you knew before starting? What's the biggest potential roadblock/problem? Any and all advice is welcome.
Edit: Any advice on marketing do's and don't's would also be appreciated.
In building a few iterations of CMSs, some of the key things turned out to be:
Having a good rich text editor - end-users really don't want to do HTML. Consensus seems to be that FCKEditor is the best - there have been a couple of questions on this here recently
Allowing people to add new pages and easily create a menu/tab structure or cross-link between pages
Determining how to fit content into a template and/or allowing users to develop the templates themselves
Figuring out how (and whether) to let people paste content from Microsoft Word - converting magic quotes, emdashes and the weirdish Wordish HTML
Including a spellchecking feature (though Firefox has something built-in and iespell may do the job for IE)
Some less critical but useful capabilities are:
- Ability to dynamically create readable and SEO-friendly URLs (the StackOverflow way is not bad)
- Ability to show earlier versions of content after it's modified
- Ability to have a sandbox for content to let it be proofread or checked before release
- Handling of multiple languages and non-English/non-ASCII characters
Well, building your own CMS actually implies that it is not an enterprise-level product. What this means is that you will not be able to actually implement all features that make CMS users happy. Not even most features. I want to clarify that by CMS I actually mean a platform for creating web applications or web sites, not a blogging platform or a scaled-down version. From personal experience I can tell you the things I want most in a CMS.
1. Extensible - provide a clean and robust API so that a programmer can do most things through code, instead of using the UI
2. Easy page creation and editing - use templates, have several URLs for a single page, provide options for URL rewriting
3. Make it component-based. Allow users to add custom functionality. Make it easy for someone to add his code to do something
4. Make it SEO-friendly. This includes metadata, again URL rewriting, good sitemap, etc.
Now there are these enterprise features that I also like, but i doubt you'll have the desire to dive into their implementation from the beginning. They include workflow (an approval process for content-creation, customizable), Built-in modules for common functionality (blogs, e-commerce, news), ability to write own modules, permissions for different users, built-in syndication, etc.
After all I speak from a developer's point of view and my opinion might not be mainstream, so you have to decide on your own in the end. Just as ahockley said - you have to know why you need to build your own CMS.
If you ask 100 different CMS users about the most important thing about their CMS, you'll probably get 80+ different answers.
The biggest roadblock is probably going to be people asking you why you built a new CMS from scratch.
If you don't know the answer to that question, I'm not sure why you're going down this path.
One thing to keep in mind is that for an internet CMS, folks are going to want integration points with many of the "usual" services. Leverage existing services such as photo sharing sites, Twitter, OpenID and the like before building your own proprietary solutions.
well i wrote a CMS for personal use and released it to the biggest chorus of chirping crickets ever! no biggie, though. i did learn a lot and i encourage you to move forward. my clients use it and like it and it's holding up fine.
but if i were to start over (and i might) here's the advice i would give myself:
scrub everything everything everything entered from the user
user administration is a product differentiator. bonus points for being able to handle someone copy/pasting from WORD.
extensibility. 90% of the comments i get are from developers who want to use the cms to host "some" of the website pages but not others. or they want to embed their custom scripts into the page among the content. my next cms will be as modular as i possibly can handle.
many folks are absolutely fanatic about clean urls.
From marketing point of view:
1) Make it templateable.
2) Make CMS SEF and have SEOed URLs.
If you need to build custom functionality where your CMS is really a window to the rest of your business layers, then use something like PyroCMS or FuelCMS which are based off of CodeIgniter framework.
Developers usually get lost in the weeds with Drupal and Joomla! / Wordpress quickly become spaghetti code-laced doozies over time. Its how much you have already drank from the Kool-aid punch bowl.
I know this isn't a direct answer to what you're looking for but if you haven't looked at it yet I'd recommend checking out CMS made simple. It has much less bloat than other CMS's and is fast and efficient. It's open source so it may be a good reference point for any questions you will run into.
Just use Drupal.
Out of the box it is very light and fast. You add modules for virtually everything, so that can be daunting but it is fantastic.
Its secure (NASA and The White House use it), its modular, its open-source, it is well supported, has a reputation for clean APIs, and has hundreds of modules from SEO to Wysiwyg....