Re: [Hampshire] [OT] Interactive Website

On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 10:30 PM, Mike Burrows
<testermike@???> wrote:
> It may be the best option just to give a select few some basic html
> instruction, a style sheet of my choosing, where to download cute FTP
> and the username and password at 1 & 1.

Only do that if you're prepared and able to spend time fixing the site
when it gets broken. I've managed sites a little like that - I've
given the content editors a Dreamweaver template that they just edit
and upload. The editors need at least to understand ftp and the basics
of web sites to get it working. It's a pain when they break it while
you're on holiday and you have to fix it via text message because you
can't get mobile signal.

My recommendation matches what others have suggested, get a CMS:
Joomla or Drupal are the usual ones. Last time I did a side by side
comparison (18months ago), Drupal came out on ease of use and set up
speed, but Joomla had more advanced functionality that was easier to
maintain. They've changed a bit since then, but I'd say fire Drupal up
and see what it does for you. It will require modification of the
existing site to put it in a CMS, but it's worth investing that time
up front when you can plan it, rather than spending that time having
to fire fight at an unknown point later on. If you go for the Q&D
option now, you're likely to be short changing yourself later.

The requirements are PHP and MySQL, which most hosting providers will
be perfectly happy with (if they're not, I can recommend some who are)
- you also have this running locally now (set up and tested with
Gallery2). Hosting is cheap, stable and secure. I wouldn't suggest
doing anything other than get it hosted professionally. If the .org
hasn't got the budget to spend the £30pa ish it'll cost, then chances
are it'll be minimally used and you'll be able to find someone with a
server with spare resources to host it for free (e.g. me).

I wouldn't have considered a wiki unless it was for mass collaboration
in a secured environment (e.g. intranet) - if you're going through the
route of securing the wiki, you may as well go for a CMS that is more
likely to fulfil your other requirements for a website. YMMV - I've
not a lot of wiki experience.

HTH,
David.