Thread

Greetings!

I’m writing on behalf of an in-house web team for a large educational institution serving over 30,000 students.  We operate a diverse intranet site with over 20,000 pages, using a bizarre hodgepodge of Geeklog, Joomla!, OpenX, a defunct commercial CMS you probably haven’t heard of, and hundreds of static pages.

Maintaining what we have is extremely challenging for a two-person team, and we are desperate to consolidate into a single, unified system which automates the repetitive and gets out of the way when we need to do something out of the ordinary.  After months of research and debate, we’ll be making a final decision next week, and nothing we’ve found is a silver bullet.  We hope you can provide one.

We’ve narrowed down our list of options down to an ExpressionEngine-based site; a custom CMS based on either CodeIgniter, Kohana, or CakePHP; or perhaps most radically, abandoning the CMS altogether and returning to static web pages, which offer unlimited flexibility, easier backups, easier searching through a Google Appliance, and better security (you can’t hack a database that doesn’t exist).

Here are our major problems with ExpressionEngine.  Hopefully, somebody will provide us with rebuttals that haven’t occurred to us.

1. Deep URLs - As I mentioned, our intranet is diverse.  We simply have not found a way to fit everything into three URL segments, which seems to be ExpressionEngine’s limit without resorting to kludgy solutions like URL segment variables.

2. Multiple groups - We have a number of employees that need to post to multiple sections of our intranet.  ExpressionEngine’s permissions are great if you can categorize employees into a single group, but that’s not possible for us.  The only solution we’ve found is to create a new “group” with permissions for just one person.

3. Ease of use - I think EE is amazingly simple to use, and very flexible with its custom weblog model.  (If we code it ourselves, we will probably base the administrative interface on a similar model.)  However, our users still have trouble.  Image handling is an example of a stumbling block - we have tried to explain the difference between the “Add URL” and “Add Link” buttons to our testers to no avail.

Keep in mind that while we are trying to unify our intranet, we are also advocating to an institution (I continue to use that word with the most optimistic of intentions) that is not convinced that the World Wide Web is more than a passing fad.  Therefore, we need the usability and productivity gains from this transition to be immediately noticeable and easy for PHBs to grasp.

If our site was just a little bit more consistent or a little smaller, we would have purchased licenses already - we’re already sold on the fundamental concept of EE, just not the ability to scale it to hundreds of mini-sites with very little in common.  Are we wrong?

Thank you so much for your help.  We appreciate it more than you realize.

Hi, Jesse!

1. Deep URLs - As I mentioned, our intranet is diverse.  We simply have not found a way to fit everything into three URL segments, which seems to be ExpressionEngine’s limit without resorting to kludgy solutions like URL segment variables.

URL segments are one of the most powerful features in ExpressionEngine.  Using them is not kludgy, it’s not a workaround - it is an incredibly powerful way to pass information throughout the system. 

Furthermore, using parameters allows you to over-ride the URL segments used by default. And granted, that should only be done once you understand the caveats that come with it, this will allow you to create the URLs that you want to use.

2. Multiple groups - We have a number of employees that need to post to multiple sections of our intranet.  ExpressionEngine’s permissions are great if you can categorize employees into a single group, but that’s not possible for us.  The only solution we’ve found is to create a new “group” with permissions for just one person.

You do need a membership group for each set of different permissions, yes.  If it’s just for authoring, you can use a Stand Alone Entry Form as well, and pass information to it via URL segments. (*insert tentative smile*).

3. Ease of use - I think EE is amazingly simple to use, and very flexible with its custom weblog model.  (If we code it ourselves, we will probably base the administrative interface on a similar model.)  However, our users still have trouble.  Image handling is an example of a stumbling block - we have tried to explain the difference between the “Add URL” and “Add Link” buttons to our testers to no avail.

I just had a look at the Default Formatting Buttons, and I see Link and Image.  Link and Image refer to different items, both inside of ExpressionEngine and outside in the general web.  I’m not sure where you see Add URL and Add Link - that would confuse me, too.

If our site was just a little bit more consistent or a little smaller, we would have purchased licenses already - we’re already sold on the fundamental concept of EE, just not the ability to scale it to hundreds of mini-sites with very little in common.  Are we wrong?

This depends what you mean by mini-sites.  If you can clarify on what your goal is there, then we can help you decide if ExpressionEngine is a good fit.  But a mini-site can mean many different things so to answer this, we’ll need more details.

Post back if you have more questions or want more details on anything I’ve said.  =)

Lisa,

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly!

I just had a look at the Default Formatting Buttons, and I see Link and
Image. Link and Image refer to different items, both inside of
ExpressionEngine and outside in the general web. I’m not sure where you
see Add URL and Add Link - that would confuse me, too.

I did mess up the wording a little.  I apologize.  Here is how you get there:

1. From a publishing screen, click Upload File.
2. In the File Upload window, you can use either the “File Upload” or “File Browser” sections.
3. Once you get to the final screen, you can choose from “View Images,” “Insert Links,” and “Insert URLs.”  Of these, the last two actually do the inserting.  “Insert Links” inserts an img tag, while “Insert URLs” inserts a raw URL prefixed with a {file} variable.

This means that the user now has at least two choices of how to insert an image.  In addition to that, they have to also remember to choose the appropriate field in the “Select Field” drop down to add the tag to.  Finally, we haven’t been able to get those buttons to affect a TinyMCE instance.  I realize this is a problem with the plugin and/or TinyMCE and has nothing to do with EE, but it’s an issue nonetheless.

This depends what you mean by mini-sites. If you can clarify on what your
goal is there, then we can help you decide if ExpressionEngine is a good
fit. But a mini-site can mean many different things so to answer this,
we’ll need more details.

For example, let’s say we have two campuses.  Within each campus, we have some number of teachers.  Each teacher wants a web site with the following sections:

1. Introduction
2. Syllabus
3. Homework assignments
4. Calendar of events

Here are some logical URLs that might result from this arrangement:

http://intranet.example.edu/west/john_doe/introduction
http://intranet.example.edu/west/john_doe/syllabus
http://intranet.example.edu/west/john_doe/homework (General homework page)
http://intranet.example.edu/west/john_doe/homework/month/200804 (Homework for a particular month)
http://intranet.example.edu/west/john_doe/homework/assignment/123 (Instructions for a particular homework assignment)

etc.

At the same time, we might want to do a staff newsletter.  The newsletter would need to have a main page, category pages, specific articles, and archived issues.  That might look like this:

http://intranet.example.edu/news/ (main page)
http://intranet.example.edu/news/profiles (category page)
http://intranet.example.edu/news/read/12345 (specific article)
http://intranet.example.edu/news/issue/20080401 (specific issue)
http://intranet.example.edu/news/issue/20080401/profiles (category within a specific issue)

There are other “mini-sites,” for lack of a better term, also.  We might want to have a HR section with job openings, benefits information, policies, etc., a cafeteria site with information on what’s for lunch and nutrition information, etc.  So although we have one intranet, we have a variety of sections with very different architectures and data requirements.  In some of those cases, the URLs go very deep, and you end up having to look at URL segments in a template much higher in the hierarchy.

Sorry about my posts being so long.  Please feel free to tentatively smile away 😊

Thanks!

If your organization has a technical solutions division which is honestly considering return to static HTML pages as a corporate solution, I think you need more help than EE or any off-the-shelf application can provide ! 😉  Who’s heard of a * properly-managed * database being hacked in this day and age ?

In my experience working with a number of ‘academic’ organisations, managing the expectations of the stakeholders and actually implementing anything, let alone meeting everyone’s granular needs, is more of a challenge than choosing the ‘perfect’ enterprise-wide solution.  Educational Institutions generally have high level management who are adept at telling other people how to do their jobs properly, rather than devolving the power to get things done, as I am sure you have encountered 😊  They also generally expect technical people to solve the needs of the business, rather than funding a properly-experienced Business Analyst reporting to a Project Director who can handle the politics and let the technical people do their stuff only after a proper Specification is signed off.

Show the project sponsor (if there is such a thing) a model of the initial and ongoing costs of custom-development, and of the HTML authoring hours which will be spent under the alternatives to EE. Presumably they will have enough experience to recognize value for money when they see it, even if they don’t have ‘real’ commercial focus. Quite often you can make the needs of the users and authors adapt to the constraints of a system, rather than vice versa.

Good luck, sounds like an ‘opportunity’. 😊

If your organization has a technical solutions division which is honestly considering return to static HTML pages as a corporate solution, I think you need more help than EE or any off-the-shelf application can provide !

I’m flattered.  You registered just to question my proposal?  😉

In a normal environment, I would totally agree that moving to static pages is bizarre and probably stupid.  However, there are mitigating factors that I wish I could get into that actually make this look like a reasonable solution.  We would be adopting other technologies to manage this as far as possible - templating would be done with offline scripts used by our web team wherever possible, Subversion would be used extensively, etc.  I know exactly what we’re getting into if we go down this road.  Right now, it’s beating the EE option by quite a bit.

Your points are well-taken, however, and I agree with them completely.

Good luck, sounds like an ‘opportunity’. 😊

I need to get out of here and start doing projects where EE would be a viable solution!  😊

Hi Jesse

Thanks for being flattered 😉 , but I registered on EE forums as we are considering using it as a solution in a Corporate roll-out ... yours happened to be the first post I saw.  Please don’t take my comments as ‘questioning’ your proposal. I just find your approach interesting - ie EE’s “last chance” to sell their product to you ?

If I was you, I would be putting pressure upwards in your organization and telling THEM it’s THEIR ‘last chance’ to properly plan and resource a suggested program of change, rather than feeling you need to have one vendor prove fitness for purpose at such an early stage. 

From what I have heard about EE I am sure it will adapt as you need, but that’s not going to help if the required management support and direction isn’t available.

It’s all only my opinion and none of my business, but because this is a forum by it’s pure definition I felt obliged to give my 2 cents worth. Apologies 😊

For such a large institution I see no reason why the multiple site manager would not be viable if deeper url’s are that essential. It’s likely a good idea for the size of it.
Add folders for each site;
/news/
/john-doe/
/intranet/
etc
Each can become a separate site using the MSM.

This means that the user now has at least two choices of how to insert an image.  In addition to that, they have to also remember to choose the appropriate field in the “Select Field” drop down to add the tag to.  Finally, we haven’t been able to get those buttons to affect a TinyMCE instance.  I realize this is a problem with the plugin and/or TinyMCE and has nothing to do with EE, but it’s an issue nonetheless.

One in an educational institution should be able to be able to tell the difference between inserting a link or url. This is a part of where EE outperforms anything else.
If one has a choice then capabilities are extended immensely.
Picking a method and then a location surely cannot be beyond someones abilities, unless it’s a primary school? (grades 1-6).I cannot see anyone going for higher education and not being able to learn the difference really.

hmmm, lets see now, I am going to insert a link into the body field…

If it’s an issue with tinymce then it has nothing to do with EE.

I started doing this 12 years ago after taking my MCSE, and I state that I have never seen another system that has the capabilities of EE, and I tried them all (well, over 40)/

Hi Bruce,

Thanks for your feedback!

For such a large institution I see no reason why the multiple site manager would not be viable if deeper url’s are that essential.

We looked at MSM and came to the conclusion that we couldn’t afford the per-site license fees.  There would be too many sites involved, and although the school has the money, our budget does not.

One in an educational institution should be able to be able to tell the difference between inserting a link or url.

Well, the first problem is that clicking “Insert Link” drops an IMG tag into the field, which is already counterintuitive, even for me.  Also, keep in mind that your MCSE certification and my web development experience put us in a different league of understanding.  The content editors who will be using this system don’t know anything about HTML, and arguably shouldn’t have to.  Their job is to write materials that make it easy for other departments to understand what they do, not code in what is, from their perspective, no easier than PHP would be.

If this isn’t enough of a reason, consider how closely Lisa came to admitting it is confusing: “I’m not sure where you see Add URL and Add Link - that would confuse me, too.”  (As I mentioned earlier, my original post was in error and the two buttons were named Insert URLs and Insert Links.)

If it’s an issue with tinymce then it has nothing to do with EE.

The problem is not really with TinyMCE but with the integration between ExpressionEngine and the TinyMCE component.  If EllisLab provided a supported WYSIWYG binding (which appears to be one of the top-requested features, if the forums are any indication), then there would be no need for Leevi (who is an awesome third-party developer, but a third-party nonetheless) to try and hack it in.

I started doing this 12 years ago after taking my MCSE, and I state that I have never seen another system that has the capabilities of EE.

I completely agree, and in fact we did end up buying a license, but the issues are still there.  I can’t be the only person who has run across these problems.  How many others have encountered these problems and decided they don’t have the time and/or technical ability to deal with them?  How many potential sales has EllisLab lost as a result?  I brought these concerns up to help them.  Ideally, EllisLab would fix these nagging issues, many more people would wave money at them, and everybody would benefit.

Well, good choice as they all have tradeoffs, EE the fewest.
Personally I detest WYSIWYG editors in every way,(everyone is entitled to my opinion), so cannot say. I know Leslie addressed this elsewhere a search should find it.

When one has instances of both files and images, inserting a url is just what’s wanted at times, a clean url to an mp3 for a player, a link for a downloadable file, an image as an image, so is difficult to name. One could rename these but I cannot think of better…

Good luck in planning your url’s 😊

I can totally relate to not liking WYSIWYGs… I personally never use them.  My text editing tool of choice is usually BBEdit.  However, I don’t think it’s realistic to require that level of skill from ordinary publishers.  If it were, then there would be no reason to buy a great CMS like EE!  😊

As for my deep URLs, the approach I’m going to try is creating a template that just conditionally embeds other templates based on a URL segment.

Anyway, thanks for the help.  I’m sure I’ll be back!

I am integrating my third EE site so thanks for the fab CMS app.

I do however have a similar problem and it’s the second time it has come up.

The site I’m integrating is large and has URLs like:

http://www.mydomain.com/services/broking/risk-management/
http://www.mydomain.com/services/broking/corporate-dealing/

What is the best way to achieve URLs as above?

Many thanks,

Richard

Have consider using the User Module from Solspace? It allows you to categorize members the same way you categorize entries. This feature and the SAEF might help you overcome the multiple groups issue.

Categories might also help you with the long URLs.

Hi, I may not have explained clearly enough. My problem does not involve any user or member issues. In fact I just realised this post was in Pre-Sales questions so I posted another entry here:

http://ellislab.com/forums/viewthread/97548/

tr309,

I believe setting up template groups, templates and categories will get you close.  By using categories and setting a Category URL Indicator (CP Home ›  Admin ›  Weblog Administration ›  Global Weblog Preferences), you’d end up with something like this:

http://www.mydomain.com/template_group/template/url_indicator/category_name

http://www.mydomain.com/services/broking/category/risk-management/
http://www.mydomain.com/services/broking/category/corporate-dealing/

Another possibility is URL Segments and Conditionals.

Okay, that sounds very interesting. I’ve used the template groups and templates before but never the category URL indicator as well. I’ll have a go and see what I can come up with.

Thanks for your help.