CMS Administration vs. Presentation Languages

By Deane Barker 2 min read
Author Description

You don’t have to display content in the same architecture in which you manage it.

AI Summary

This post explores the distinction between CMS administration and presentation languages, emphasizing their roles in web development. The author discusses how these components interact, highlighting the importance of understanding their differences for effective content management and site presentation.

Updates
This content has been updated 1 time since it was first published. The last update happened .

Joe’s ColdFusion post got me thinking about a little fling I had with ColdFusion a few years back. I liked it for its simplicity and declarative syntax, but I didn’t think it had enough depth.

However, wouldn’t it be great as a templating language for an existing CMS? It’s lightweight, simple, plays well with HTML, etc. In a larger sense, who says that your content needs to be presented by the same language that your CMS is written in? Separation is good.

Think of content management as having two sides – (1) managing and administering content, and (2) displaying content. (I would actually argue – and I have – that content management has nothing to do with displaying content, but stick with me here.)

Now, lets put the 50-yard line of this game at the database. So the creation, management, approval, and general administration of content all leads up to one moment – when a certain content record in a database table is declared “active.” Everything is working up to that point. The “active” records in the database table are free to be used on the public side of the site.

Why not just create a view of the database that only includes those records, then give your designers and presentation specialists a read-only user and a copy of ColdFusion? Who says that the language the CMS is programmed in has to be the language the content is presented in?

I’ve talked before about the fact that the management of content is the hard part, The presentation of content is usually pretty easy, while actually getting content to the 50-yard line of our situation – through creation, adding of metadata, approvals, various workflows, etc. – is the real value-add of content management.

I say use whatever language you need to program your CMS, but don’t feel compelled to use that same language for presenting the content. ColdFusion would be perfect in this capacity (and ColdFusion Express is – or was – free). Client-tools work work well here as well – Dreamweaver has great database integration, and FrontPage would even work in a pinch. And who could forget about Escapade?

I working on a CMS right now, and I’m tempted to bag the entire built-in templating system I have and just leverage an existing language for it. I’m suddenly enamored with the idea of drawing a defined “content line” and having a complete separation of systems on either side of, with the only common element the database itself.

Update

Added on

This was written before I directly understood the concepts of “management” and “delivery.” Well, I understood them intuitively, but never named them, and it was advent of headless CMS that really pushed them.

I also talked about this in The Value-Add Side of CMS.

Links to this – The State of the Headless CMS Market February 8, 2017
A look at the current players -- intentional or otherwise -- in the headless CMS market.
Links to this – Use Cases for a Headless CMS December 14, 2016
There are some interesting reasons to use a headless CMS that go beyond the "single website" model.
Links to this – Decoupled Content Management 101 March 26, 2011
Originally, content management repositories were separated from the publishing layer. This line has blurred over the years, and there are numerous models that combine aspects of both decoupled and "active" delivery tiers.
Links to this – Towards a Content Modeling Standard April 24, 2019
This industry would benefit greatly if only we could agree on how content is modeled.
Links from this – CMS's Should Manage Content, Not Display It February 18, 2004
A CMS that interferes too much with the display and rendering of content can drive you nuts.
Links from this – The Value-Add Side of CMS June 19, 2003
Managing content is hard. Templating it is not. Which side of the equation is delivering the value?