Re: Best for articles management
  • 2004/2/29 4:37

  • JackJ

  • Community Support Member

  • Posts: 747

  • Since: 2003/8/31

Can’t sleep tonight, so I thought I would ramble a bit.

Yes, icontent is also a terrific module. At XOOPS now we have above average content modules..

Soapbox is another excellent new player, and wfsections aside.. , probably going to be one of the most popular module that XOOPS currently has, if it is not already. It has a modern look and appeal. The "columns" part on the index page, although very good, is magazine style--which may not be everyone’s preference, but the individual columns "pages" have what I am looking for. That is, the layout is like the "news" module i.e.

Article image, short introduction, and "read more" which most modern sites have. Ideally the ability to have the page split into two or three "columns" of articles (in the actual column sense) would also be very nice.

An archive would also be smashing?

Most of the content modules fall down a bit on the appearance of the index page in my view. Soapbox has probably the best there is at the moment for article presentation. However, with a little hacking, each module can be altered the way we might like if we have a bit of know how. They are of course free, and these developers have worked very hard to produce them.

I also would love the ability to set one page as a "default" home page in these content modules. We can’t expect developers to provide everything we individually want--they have provided the coding and framework for us to further build on if we wish.

Xoops will one day become the top open source cms. I don’t know why it is not--perhaps we are not voting where we should?

Looking forward to the next wfsections, goodness, I need to get a life..

Probably delete this rambling in the morning ohhhhh, it is the morning..

Re: Best for articles management
  • 2004/2/29 7:28

  • carnuke

  • Home away from home

  • Posts: 1955

  • Since: 2003/11/5

Hi Jim, Nice to see your site up again... it loads up just fine now, no slow drag anymore.

Foy those who would like to see a preview of the next wf sections there is a demo version HERE
You do need to register on this site to see it though. At least it should give an idea of the new features webside


Re: Best for articles management
  • 2004/2/29 21:34

  • hemertje

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 32

  • Since: 2004/2/14

Is it possible to use the searchengine together with a management module like icontect or ws-sections or...?

Because I want to use the searchengine for every page on my site!

Which manager can I use best for this applications?

Thank you, Hemertje

Re: Best for articles management
  • 2004/3/6 15:53

  • Maracas

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 66

  • Since: 2004/2/18

Got a little bit further into these article management modules comparisons, but not a lot because I have been working on other parts of my site.

So far, overall, iContent seems to be leading the pack for me. The biggest reason is because it does not automatically assume that only registered users will be writing articles. The other major players seem to default to only registered (or perhaps anonymous) users being able to author articles. I am looking at posting articles written by people who will not ever register at the site.

I love the look of Soapbox but it seems to default to only registered users as article authors and the author has to have his/her own column (unless I am missing something here, which is always possible). I tried leaving the box blank but the authors are then named "Anonymous". If I had the ability to just add the author name I wanted, this would be my choice hands down. And having the ability to use the columns as article categories without being owned by an author would be nice, too.

WF and XF Sections have a boatload of configuration options but I couldn't find how to configure an author other than the person submitting the article or a registered user. I could lay out an article and bring it in but it always shows the author as me.

I've rambled on enough. It's open source and the content modules available are wonderful, actually. I just wish most didn't automatically assume that only registered users would be article authors or submitters.

My wish list for an article manager module:

1. The ability to post articles written by people who are not ever going to register on the site and have them acknowledged accordingly, without having a registered user as the default author.

2. A modern layout as great as Soapbox's.

3. Content automatically searchable by the native XOOPS search function.

4. A configurable/optional default first page, from where you could launch the articles content area.

Just a few of my wishes. Of course, with my luck, one of the available modules will already to these things and I am just too thick to have figured it out already.

My hat's off to the module authors. They have done great work on articles management. I, for one, appreciate it very much.

Re: Best for articles management
  • 2004/12/14 0:42

  • javelin

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 160

  • Since: 2004/3/11

Sorry to drag this one up again but it's getting a mite confusing with all the goodies available.

So at the risk of causing a riot what do you think is the best module for the following scenario.

Race car rule book,
240 A4 pages of regulations plus 10 pages of various forms.

The reg's are split into 5 sections and an apendix.

The regulations get updated a section at a time.
The section that is replaced must be available as there is a 1 year compliance rule, which means that for 1 year after a regulation has been updated you can still work to the old version.
In other words there needs to be an archive facility.

Notifications are important. (it has been known for teams to comply with a new rule with just minutes to spare, so notification and the timing of issue is important)

Comments are not important, although at a push we could use them as a sort of archive.

Any ideas?

Re: Best for articles management
  • 2004/12/14 1:27

  • brash

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 2206

  • Since: 2003/4/10

I would say either AMS or WF-Section as they are the only two aricle modules available for XOOPS that have an article versioning system in place. This means you'll be able to update your regulations while still keeping a copy of the previous version which you can switch to and edit at any time.

I know this is a biased view as I'm part of the AMS team, but if your site experiences a high amount of traffic, then I would probably suggest you go with AMS as performance wise it is well ahead of WF-Section. That is to be expected though as WF-Section is still in beta, and I know the guys are working very hard on the performance side of things.

Re: Best for articles management
  • 2004/12/14 18:56

  • charpres

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 168

  • Since: 2003/9/4 2

For many sites the article management system used is extremely important. I would say that at the very least someone who is trying to decide which system to use should run the two or three most likely systems side-by-side on a test site to determine which is the best choice. Once you choose a system and have it running, it is very hard to switch if you make the wrong choice.

Re: Best for articles management
  • 2004/12/14 20:52

  • javelin

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 160

  • Since: 2004/3/11

The selecting of that two or three is still an issue.

We could do with a review panel who can idependantly review each module and provide some pro's and con's

I've been using XOOPS since March time and am still on a very steep learning curve.
It must be very hard for newbie's to select the right module from the Repository based on the rather brief and often biased module information.

I know there is a rating system but it doesn't seem to be widely used and the viewer can't see who voted and so can't be sure of the credibility of the vote.

Re: Best for articles management
  • 2004/12/14 22:02

  • brash

  • Friend of XOOPS

  • Posts: 2206

  • Since: 2003/4/10

You raise some very valid points javelin. I think finding the most efficient, and easiest to maintain way of disseminating information to users is the hardest job any webmaster has got. Especially with a site like XOOPS where there are so many projects on the boil outside of the borders of the XOOPS site.

For instance, off the top of my head, of modules that I've crossed paths;


And there are MANY more that I haven't crossed paths with, so this little list really is only the tip of the iceberg. So you can see with this kind of widespread development going on, it is a HUGE job to (a) collect all the information regarding all these independant development projects, (b) collate that information in a way so users can easily find what they are after, and (c) keep that development news up to date.

A review panel is a good idea, but who is to do it? As has been pointed out many times before, there seems to be a lot of great suggestions being made on the XOOPS forums, but very rarely do we find someone to take that idea by the horns and get the job done.

Also, how would such a review panel construct their reviews? What is better for one site is not necessarily going to be better for another. The reviews would NEED to be constructed in a way so as to remove subjective argument. Perhaps something like a feature comparision chart, but then again that isn't a true representitive of what is the btter modules as very few modules are designed to do the same thing. It's a horses for courses senario, and there can be no single definitive resource for assertaining which module is the best.

I aggree with your point about the rating system. Personally I don't think you should be allowed to rate an item where you don't place a short paragraph indicating the who, what, where and why of your opinion. As you say, a simple number rating does not reveal the context in which they were made, and as such detracts from their validity.

Anyway, back to your original question. Based on the requirements you've posted I would advise you to install WF-Section V2 and AMS on a test site and see which one you like the most, as they are the only two that support version control.

Re: Best for articles management
  • 2004/12/15 0:46

  • javelin

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 160

  • Since: 2004/3/11


brash wrote:
A review panel is a good idea, but who is to do it? As has been pointed out many times before, there seems to be a lot of great suggestions being made on the XOOPS forums, but very rarely do we find someone to take that idea by the horns and get the job done.

I'm going to regret this I know,

OK consider horns grasped or at least touched lightly depending on the responce.

How about five or six core members of a review group.
a Just popping in (like me!),
a Quite a regular,
a Community Support Member,
a friend of XOOPS,
a XOOPS Core Developer
a Quite a regular

First job is to select which set of modules to start with.
If for example we picked on Calendars.
Currently there are 7 Calendar modules.
Shouldn't take too long, maybe a month?
The core group would agree a testing schedule, each go and try the module looking at a specific angle, Newbie = ease of use, Developer = standard of code etc.
Report back, agree on pro's and con's,
award X number of
Resized Image

Post findings in a standardised fashion, maybe invite original module developers to comment on our findings with any updates in the offing etc.

This could be fun

Might have to change my avatar to
Resized Image
Not known for an excess of tact!

This is all off the top of my head and it obviously needs to be taken a little more seriously if we are to move forward.

Anyone interested?


Who's Online

675 user(s) are online (45 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)

Members: 0

Guests: 675



Goal: $100.00
Due Date: Jul 31
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits