Axel Berger wrote:
> "Don - HtmlFixIt.com" wrote:
> > PHP-Nuke
> For what it's worth I have found all promises along the lines of "this
> allows you to achieve something highly skilled without the bother of
> needing to learn anything" not to be fulfilled. I have yet to see any
> page in any site using content management that validates. I stick to
> pure old fashioned hand coding and avoid duplication through server side
Well, in terms of validation, the Drupal code is pretty clean.
I'm a stickler for code cleanliness, and I'm reasonably satisfied
with what Drupal generates. You can do tables-based stuff, CSS-
based stuff, and choose different kinds of strictness.
Before anyone thinks I'm a Drupal evangelist, I'm not. There are
times when using a CMS is appropriate, and times when coding by
hand is better. It all depends on what you want to do, and what
kinds of users your site will be accommodating, in terms of both
site visitors and content creators or providers. There's a gray
area too in terms of what exactly a content management system is.
I mean, at the one end, you have collaborative content creation,
workflow management, individual user spaces, version controls,
and all sorts of privilege levels. At the other end, you could
have your personal blog pages. Just you, your personal site, and
some blog API. Both are types of content management. I agree
though, that if you're just creating a bunch of static pages and
have no need for any sort of access controls, coding straight by
hand is probably a better route for you. I also agree that there
is no "forehead-proof" CMS interface that also offers reasonably
clean code, wide flexibility, and enterprise-grade power.