![]() This module enables end users to choose on-the-fly between predefined Paragraph Types independent from one another, where a Paragraph Type is any unit of content (e.g. In Drupal, monolithic content can be broken up with the Paragraphs module, a favorite of Mediacurrent’s. This allows for more granular control and reuse of content. Note also that in the AEM example, content is broken up into small pieces, rather than one monolithic body. Drag and drop functionality can be achieved either with the Panels module, or by using Acquia’s Lift service and accompanying Lift Connector module.Īcquia Lift’s drag and drop UI is quite similar to AEM’s On the Drupal side, a combination of Drupal modules can match this functionality. The user drags an image from the left into the main body Here’s a drag-and-drop example from AEM’s online documentation: Other non-text items can be dragged in too, including images, video, and even interactive Javascript widgets. These are small pieces of content (text, images, or other media) that can be dragged into an article, and reused across articles. ![]() An article’s content can be created or edited using what Adobe calls “content fragments”. ![]() A content author can begin creating an article using one of many pre-existing templates. Let’s take the authoring of an article as an example. AEM features a highly flexible, drag-and-drop user interface for many content authoring tasks, and a tight integration with many of Adobe’s other technologies. For those familiar with more personal-level site builders like Squarespace or Wix, AEM’s authoring experience is similar, yet more configurable. Content Author’s PerspectiveĪEM’s strongest suit is its user experience for content authors. However, I endeavor to be objective in this blog post - indeed, I admire Adobe and what they’ve created with AEM - and I highlight AEM’s advantages as they present themselves. Part 2 will focus on the IT and Community perspectives.Īn obvious caveat: as a long-time Drupalist and Mediacurrent employee, I’m a biased observer. Part 1 of this blog post focuses on three perspectives: the Content Author’s perspective, the Marketer’s perspective, and the Business perspective. Stakeholders can include content authors, marketers, developers, decision-makers, and more. How two CMSs compare depends largely on the perspective of the type of stakeholder. In an effort to go into more detail on those three CMS’s, this two-part blog post compares Drupal and AEM, with a future blog post comparing Drupal and Sitecore. At this writing, the most recent report places Acquia/Drupal, Adobe Experience Manager (AEM), and Sitecore as the three leaders in the field, based on both their completeness of vision and their ability to execute on organizational requirements. One oft-cited annual report is Gartner’s magic quadrant report comparing CMSs at the Enterprise Level. Each CMS comes with its own strengths and weaknesses in light of an organization’s requirements, and it behooves the organization to read up on these comparisons and consult with digital agencies like Mediacurrent before deciding on which CMS to use. There is a good deal of publicly-accessible content comparing enterprise-level Content Management Systems (CMS) in terms of features, functionality, and cost. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |