Design & the CMS need not be enemies
Recently, I attended an ADCMW event and listened to Chris Cashdollar and Kevin M. Hoffman (from Happy Cog) give a presentation on various topics such as their work, their process, and more.
For the most part, the discussion was interesting and I was struck by how many similarities their process shares with our own. Also, there were some interesting things that I had never considered before, such as designing a meeting and how that can be an effective tool to increase efficiency.
However, there was a point in the discussion when Kevin was talking about the inflexibility of a CMS their team was tasked to work with, and he essentially said, "If anyone ever tells you that a CMS does not put limitations on the design, they are liars."
Wow - that is a pretty bold statement. And one that I take issue with. Sure, CMS's do add a layer of developmental complexity but to say that they are inflexible and dictate design is a little extremist.
Personally, in the three years I have been managing CMS projects, I/we have never told a designer that they had to change their design to conform to what the CMS can do. Have we sometimes made design decisions based on what the CMS we are using makes easy? Absolutely, that makes good business sense - but it is a practice that is done sparingly and in very specific cases where there is a huge upside or a project condition that necessitates it (budget, timeline, whatever).
Perhaps what Kevin meant was that proprietary CMS systems are often billed as being more flexible than they really are. That is certainly a scenario I can appreciate. But in the world of open source, and Drupal specifically, either the community at large or driven, talented developers can over-come pretty much anything a complicated design can throw their way. It is this distinction that I think is important to make - certainly for anyone who is unaware of the difference might walk away from the discussion thinking that they should suddenly war against CMS X because it will 'dictate their design.'
Which simply isn't true.
Comments
Argument for arguments sake
Making a blanket statement is always a recipe for trouble - we live in an infinite universe which physically precludes absolutes. However, back here on planet earth, Kevin's point stands true.
Does your project has an infinite amount of development time, bankrolled by an infinitely wealthy client? If not, your CMS exerts limitations on your design.
It sounds like you've already come across these limitations, you've just renamed it "good business sense" - which it is.
Cheers, Aidan
An interesting perspective
Aidan
Thanks for joining the discussion!
While I agree that timeline and budget can have an impact on decisions (both CMS feature related and design related) that still doesn't invalidate my point. The CMS itself has almost nothing to do with design decisions - and furthermore, I have never had to limit a designers creativity or desired aesthetic direction due to the inherent functionality of the CMS itself, or limitations due to developer constraints.
I can think of several examples of clients who had aggressive timelines, budgetary constraints, or both - and we were still able to execute a design without 'CMS based' limitations. Tnr.com, NBPA.com and Rareplanet.org all come to mind - all utilize Drupal, all had specific budgets and aggressive timelines - and as you can see, all have very different designs.
I agree with you. While
I agree with you. While sometimes I may make a suggestion "If we do it this way instead it will (save you money / allow you to do X / be more maintainable)", I've never come across a design that couldn't be done in Drupal.
Post new comment