Re: Versioning options

We developed "records management" to do this as an open-source stack.

We call it archiving not versioning. Why version? It could be the same 
document with different file names. I think versioning is useful from 
personal point of view. We do have versions and it is not that important 
from archival point of view.

We think that records management is more like document management not 
information management.  We built it for non-profits to keep records for 
legal reasons. like keeping recrods for 7 years and so on.



Hilary Marsh wrote:

> To me, it would all be valuable. Versioning can be a legal issue, so 
> I'd advocate for tracking everything that was live at a given time.
>
> A client of mine started using their CMS specifically for this 
> capability. They are a large financial services firm that offers 
> several credit cards, so they had a legal requirement to track all the 
> information that appeared on the disclaimer pages of their site. A 
> customer might be responding to a headline or content, or have gotten 
> to the page via the metadata, so they tracked everything.
>
> Ultimately, it depends on the kind of content you're referring to. You 
> might identify some content types or areas that have more detailed 
> requirements and some with less. The requirement's importance will 
> also depend on the level of difficulty for creating field-level 
> versioning in your CMS.
>
> --Hilary
>
>
> At 4:49 PM +0100 5/17/05, Julian Voelcker wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> What are the views of the panel on versioning?
>>
>> In addition to providing it for page contents, is it worth providing it
>> for the page titles, keywords and descriptions as well?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Julian Voelcker
>
>
>