Skip to main content

The difference between a portal and a WCMS

What is the difference between a portal and a WCMS? I've been asking myself that question since the beginning of this thesis. Others have asked as well. Indeed, the WCMS I've been working on for Primetime used to be called Primetime Portal.

Now it seems the question is bubbling around in the CMS blogosphere these days. John Quirk suggests "..if they are dealing with content a CMS solution is where they should be focused. If they are planning on allowing access to back end applications or information stored in those applications, a portal solution is a better fit.". Toby Ward claims the gap will shrink (or blur, perhaps making it easier to fall down the gap?) as both product families grow and mature. Bob Boiko suggests Knowledge Portals are the last trick from the KM camp. James Robertson has written a white-paper on business portals, explains the concept of portals rather well.

When I present my thesis to more-or-less technology aware people, they sometimes ask "Oh, you're writing about portals then?". The word portal sometimes seems to have become synonymous with company homepage. The definitions are a bit loose, so the answer could actually be yes. The views below explain why:

Portal people: Content management is part of the portal. We have a CMS portlet in our portal. A CMS alone doesn't have personalization or integration of different content sources, nor pluggable functionality in the form of portlets.

CMS people: A portal is just one way to display the CMS to the end user, just like a blog is another (smaller) way to perform CM. Portal is just a hyped product name. CM is the theory behind it. We have pluggable functionality in the form of templates. Personalization is pointless (who cares if you want a pink webpage?).

A CMS is content oriented. Is a portal knowledge oriented? Portals try to be the silver bullet of corporate information management, but the above bloggers suggest that they have become too complex and do still not possess sufficient CMS functionality. Don't get me wrong, portals are very useful for distributed corporations, serving as a central source of information. I haven't played around with too many enterprise class portals, but I can guess they still lack CMS-functionality like content version control, wysiwyg editing and workflow, as Ward mentioned.

So how to relate to portals in the thesis? Should a portal be part of a CM strategy, or should the portal be an integration tool outside the CMS? I think I'll go for the latter alternative and rather focus on WCMS, might mention portal in a side note.

Disclaimer: Suffering with a terrible cold here, so mind that some of these ramblings might be fever inspired ;)

Comments

  1. Anonymous10/2/06 16:31

    Interesting question..
    I consider CMS to be actually consisting of content creation, content management and content delivery. COntent delivery is where I think portals belong. If there is a tight coupling between content management and delivery, than CMS can be a part of portal (or vice versa). However, if they are loosly coupled, they would be different. Both kinds of architectures are prevalant. Vignette, Fatwire, OpenCMS etc fall in the first category, wheread Interwoven, Documentum, ALfresco would fall in the second category.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Open source CMS evaluations

I have now seen three more or less serious open source CMS reviews. First guy to hit the field was Matt Raible ( 1 2 3 4 ), ending up with Drupal , Joomla , Magnolia , OpenCms and MeshCMS being runner-ups. Then there is OpenAdvantage that tries out a handful ( Drupal , Exponent CMS , Lenya , Mambo , and Silva ), including Plone which they use for their own site (funny/annoying that the entire site has no RSS-feeds, nor is it possible to comment on the articles), following Matt's approach by exluding many CMS that seem not to fit the criteria. It is somewhat strange that OpenAdvantage cuts away Magnolia because it "Requires J2EE server; difficult to install and configure; more of a framework than CMS", and proceed to include Apache Lenya in the full evaluation. Magnolia does not require a J2EE server. It runs on Tomcat just like Lenya does (maybe it's an idea to bundle Magnolia with Jetty to make it seem more lightweight). I'm still sure that OpenAdvant

Considerations for JavaScript in Modern (2013) Java/Maven Projects

Disclaimer: I'm a Java developer, not a JavaScript developer. This is just what I've picked up the last years plus a little research the last days. It's just a snapshot of my current knowledge and opinions on the day of writing, apt to change over the next weeks/months. We've gone all modern in our web applications, doing MVC on the client side with AngularJS or Ember , building single-page webapps with REST backends. But how are we managing the growing amount of JavaScript in our application? Yeoman 's logo (not necessarily the conclusion of this blog post) You ain't in Kansas anymore So far we've just been doing half-random stuff. We download some version of a library and throw it into our src/main/webapp/js/lib , or we use it from a CDN , which may be down or unreachable when we want to use the application.. Some times the JS is minified, other times it's not. Some times we name the file with version number, other times without. Some

Git Stash Blooper (Could not restore untracked files from stash)

The other day I accidentally did a git stash -a , which means it stashes *everything*, including ignored output files (target, build, classes, etc). Ooooops.. What I meant to do was git stash -u , meaning stash modifications plus untracked new files. Anyhows, I ended up with a big fat stash I couldn't get back out. Each time I tried, I got something like this: .../target/temp/dozer.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/temp/core.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/temp/joda-time.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/foo.war already exists, no checkout Could not restore untracked files from stash No matter how I tried checking out different revisions (like the one where I actually made the stash), or using --force, I got the same error. Now these were one of those "keep cool for a second, there's a git way to fix this"situation. I figured: A stash is basically a commit. If we look at my recent commits using   git log --graph --

Managing dot-files with vcsh and myrepos

Say I want to get my dot-files out on a new computer. Here's what I do: # install vcsh & myrepos via apt/brew/etc vcsh clone https://github.com/tfnico/config-mr.git mr mr update Done! All dot-files are ready to use and in place. No deploy command, no linking up symlinks to the files . No checking/out in my entire home directory as a Git repository. Yet, all my dot-files are neatly kept in fine-grained repositories, and any changes I make are immediately ready to be committed: config-atom.git     -> ~/.atom/* config-mr.git     -> ~/.mrconfig     -> ~/.config/mr/* config-tmuxinator.git       -> ~/.tmuxinator/* config-vim.git     -> ~/.vimrc     -> ~/.vim/* config-bin.git        -> ~/bin/* config-git.git               -> ~/.gitconfig config-tmux.git       -> ~/.tmux.conf     config-zsh.git     -> ~/.zshrc How can this be? The key here is to use vcsh to keep track of your dot-files, and its partner myrepos/mr for o

Leaving eyeo

Thirteen blog posts later, this one notes my departure from eyeo after 4 years and 3 months. I joined eyeo around the headcount of 80 employees, and now I think there's just over 250 people there. My role coming in was as operations manager, doing a mix of infrastructure engineering and technical project management. I later on took on organizational development to help the company deal with its growing pains . We introduced cross-functional teams, departments (kind of like guilds), new leadership structures, goal-setting frameworks, onboarding processes and career frameworks.  And all of this in a rapidly growing distributed company. I'm proud and happy that for a long time I knew every employee by name and got to meet every single new-hire through training them on company structure and processes.  At some point, we had enough experienced leaders and organizational developers that I could zoom back in on working in one team, consulting them on  Git and continuous integration