Component content management as content mashup
Explaining CCM (component content management) to clients is sometimes difficult. The concept of combining content at the component level to create topics, which then get combined to create publications – or not; sometimes, topics just remain topics – is complex to understand to people who aren’t typically involved in the production or management of content.
Ironically, one group that has a hard time with the concepts of CCM are the IS/IT groups. For a while, this flummoxed me, as I thought that an understanding of the technology side would be an advantage to understanding it. Then it dawned on me that knowing the general principles of content management could actually become a barrier. Content management has become synonymous with WCM (Web Content Management), with CCM considered an obscure niche within the broader field, and WCM does not handle content at a sufficiently granular level. The final two words, “content management” are the same, but it’s the first word that makes the functional difference. It’s a little like thinking a truck is a truck, whether the prefix is “moving” or “dump”.
The difference is a little like that. For the average WCM system, content is input directly into the content management system, and managed at whatever level the content is input – generally, at the page level. A change to made to a page, and an edit udpates the entire page.
For the average CCM system, the content is created in smaller-than-page chunks, and assembled, much like a content mashup, to create a larger-sized page for output. A change is made to a component, which can be a single word, phrase, paragraph, or larger, which is then compiled, much like a software “build”, which generates a presentation version of the specified sources. The aggregated content can be pushed out to a Web page, a PDF, or a print destination.

When we think of mashups, we think of the Wikipedia definition of a mashup, which is combining data from two or more sources to create a richer information set. A common mash-up is an address with a map, that displays that includes both components as a single, integrated screen, with more meaning. A content mashup is similar – for example, when an ecommerce retailer pulls product descriptions from one data source and the prices from a financial system to mash together and display according to the requested content.
The technology that allows content to be mashed up before making it to the end display is an XML editor. The editor allows authors to determine how the components will be mashed together, whether that be through a manual mechanism such as a content map, or automated through an information retrieval system such as a taxonomy or thesaurus.
Whether understanding CCM as a mashup application is helpful for purposes of explaining to the technical parties remains to be seen. I do suspect that the analogy will strike a chord with a certain client segment, though, and that’s about all I can ask.
Popularity: 8% [?]
Comments
2 Responses to “Component content management as content mashup”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- Managing Your Brand Online: Two Workshops
- Underestimating the “yes but” factor
- Registration now open for content strategy conference
- Consequences of not having a good content strategy
- Content strategy explained: two perspectives
- Naming the “other” type of content strategy
- Managing Your Online Brand: A Vancouver Workshop
- How to alienate customers and drive away prospects
- Treasure and the hunt: a content strategy take on user experience
- Favicons
Categories
Tags
accessibility ann rockley career development CMS content as asset content convergence content management content strategy convergence DITA Duo Consulting experience design Flash implementation information architecture integration intelligent content interaction design management marketing mentors microformats open standards politics processes professional development ROI search section 508 services single-sourcing social media STC structured content syndication taxonomy TechCraft translation Twitter usability user-centered design user-generated content user experience value XMLPopular
- Using topic-based writing to meet aggressive deadlines
- Flash pages, skip intros, and other annoying content
- Content strategy includes convergence, integration, and syndication
- Content strategy and the new face of documentation
- CMS selection practices need maturation
- Redefining content strategy
- A practical definition of content
- The Content is Not in the Tool: Using Blogging, Microblogging, and Related Social Media Tools to Get Jobs and Influence People (or not)
- 5 Top Business Benefits of Content Re-Use
- Having community means growing community
Random Posts
- Considerable: RT @ChrisMcQueen: Rapid Prototyping with SketchFlow http://bit.ly/a9iNju 12 hrs ago
- Called the baby ugly? RT @doriantaylor: The principle of one degree: http://bit.ly/9418W8 #software #UX #projectmanagement 16 hrs ago
- Webinar on #contentstrategy for Mar 16: http://bit.ly/9n7UE1 - last chance to sign up. 19 hrs ago
- RT @tomjohnson: Presentation on voice is going to rock, because I'll include samples for everything. Without the samples, too abstract. 21 hrs ago
- More updates...









Latest Tweets
RSS feed
Twitter
Hi Rahel,
Good post! As a CMS consultant I love the idea of CCM and struggle to frame it/create it within current WCM technologies. I see the “content mashup” as the future, yet it is difficult to reconcile it with the page-based structured data we build in WCM.
When you talk about a CCM system, are you referring to particular vendors or products? I am curious to know.
When I refer to component content management, I’m talking about a system in the sense of “a complex of methods or rules governing behavior” or “a group of independent but interrelated elements comprising a unified whole” (both definitions from Wikipedia). CCM has a greatly different set of methods and rules from WCM, and this is not well understood within the greater industry yet.
There are vendors and products, which change from time to time as companies get bought out by others. A great source of information about specific vendors and how their products work is through CMS Watch, who create vendor-neutral reports.