RE: Standard list of WCMS features

> Software is malleable if you have deep pockets when you start to hit
> that wall.

...or...if you build it yourself.

Sometimes you only have X dollars to spend. You can spend X dollars on
commercial product and subsidize the 50% of the features you aren't using,
or you can spend X dollars on a custom solution and maybe get 50% of the
features you wanted, but those will be tailored to your specific needs, and
will allow you to grow the solution as you go along.

Both valid methods depending on particulars.

> Much better to find a solution that works properly, does *most* of
> what you want without extensive programming customizations and can be
> easily learned by replacement. The prevailing thought that a CMS must
> have lots of customization to "fit the company" is vendor sales talk
> to position their professional services.

I agree. I wasn't trying to make that claim. Apologies if that's how it came
across. 'Customizations' is bad. 'Open API' is good...if it works and is
truly open and well documented.

I disagree with the 'most' statement though. I think it's much better to
find a solution that works properly for the CORE features you need. From my
limited experience with CMSes, I think simpler is better. 

> I say write the software properly in the first place for a particular
> type of delivery (Web, records, documents, etc) and stop trying to
> sell yourself as being all things to all people.

Hear, hear!

> Sorry, but I learned the  hard way.

Same here. We did a ton of research, finally purchased a product, and threw
it away after 2 weeks of use. We're now building our own system with half
the features, but the features it will have will work. ;o)

-Darrel