...
Does well:
Templates, security issues, enforce initial design, story types, manage and propagate change with lots of granularity
Does not do well: Custom elements (e.g., no support for collection data types), has API but does not offer enough benefits, can't share elements easily among CS sites, can only send 'recipe' and others have to recreate it.
ILR is a CS success story because CS does for them what they wanted done (page driven site with discrete content added organically, incrementally, hierarchical site, collaborative authorship)There are a thousand content management systems out there - evaluation is a huge deal - some might be better for Cornell than others but he would pick CS again for ILR - he has peace of mind about succession planning - there is a supportive community on campus around CS - if in 5 years CU wants to move to another system we should all do it together.
...
There was no mention of platforms again in minutes again until May 22 meeting when decision had already been made.
...