What CMS should I use???

i love joomla and xoops, but for a straightforward cms without the high learning curve, try website baker and cmsmadesimple. few plugins now, but the content management part is super easy. cmsmadesimple is especially easy to template. just a few tags and you're done. caution: website baker is not fully xhmtl compliant...

 

Sorry for a bit off-topic.
But what're the advantages (or disadvantages) of being (or NOT being) XHTML / W3C compliant?

 

Has anyone tried Etomite ?

http://www.etomite.org/

I found this cms from a coop link. Have SEF structure.

Regards,
Tuning

 

If nothing else, SE's *might* give bonus points for compliance. (Anyone ever done any testing on this?) Because, theoretically, it makes your site easier for them to understand. You also make the content available to smaller, simpler browsers, which means a larger potential audience.

The advantage to non-compliance? Hmm. You use old, crappy code that generates non-compliant pages. It's old and crappy, but it's been around forever and it works. Oh, and you save [insignificant] bandwidth by leaving off all your closing tags.

 

Exactly. I love plone, but, for now, the hosts which can support it are outside my budget.

 

I thought this was pretty amusing, too.

I've never even considered trying mambo/joomla. Its position as "least secure CMS on the planet" at cmsmatrix.org ruined it for me. I'm currently using postnuke, but I'm not really happy with it.

 

Mambo (and Joomla currently) have many vulnerabilities.
There are about nearly 20 in its history.

Postnuke is not good at that either, similar to Mambo.
Maybe it is a problem in nuke family (eg phpnuke).

Drupal, Xoops, Typo3, eZ publish, SPIP & Xaraya have very few vulnerabilities (eg 2/3 or even 0).


Reference:
http://www.osvdb.org/compatibility.php

 

I still think so, but it's just a guess.

I think more than 85% of people use IE.
The second is Firefox. These 2 browsers really make up nearly al market shares. As long as my website can be read by these 2, the compliance issue is not important. Can't really see "a large potential audience"?!

Maybe it is easier to develop.
It is tedious to comply with these "stupid" web standards.
(joking)

We may find the bandwidth saved from a lot of unnecessary tags helpful. Maybe we can serve for a few more visitors, or we can play around with these bandwidth ;P