SC.xml?? NavigationTree.xml??

[sfrank7]

Can some person please tell me what is SC.xml and NavigationTree.xml??

The wiki say http://wiki.alfresco.com/wiki/WSF

#  Create a site-configuration content item using web form, site-configuration, and name it as SC and put it under "/content/site-configuration". You can just create a dummy one with the name SC and then update it with the SC.xml under extra folder.
# Create a navigation content item using web form, navigation, and name it as NavigationTree and put it under "/content/navigation". Again, you can just create a dummy one and update it with NavigationTree.xml under extra folder. If you want to use different name, you then need to adjust the navigation setting in SC.xml.

but there is none of these files in extras??!

Why does not the user interface create these files if they are always required? Why has this been made very user unfriendly to make a very simple web site with WCM? No other system I am trying makes it this hard!!

I try to like Alfresco, but it does not make anything easy

[d_mon]

I think the reason is that those files should be created using web form, hence they can't be simply imported (but I can be mistaken).
So u first create them manually with empty content and then update with downloaded SC.xml and NavigationTree.xml files. (using Update button)
Files can be downloaded from http://forge.alfresco.com/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php/branches/wsf_1.0/extras/?root=wsf

[sfrank7]

Thank you. I do not know how I was going to find those with no help?!!

Still I think we will not use Alfresco if it is so unfriendly. I think there is lots of work before we can use this product. Maybe I wait for v3.0!!!

[kvc]

Alfresco follows a different model that is designed to assist in the development of any website - large or small, static or dynamic, written in JSP or PHP or .NET.  As such, we are not a Drupal and a Plone and do not lock you into one particular app framework or scripting language or manner of building your site.  You can use Alfresco for this very reason to manage a variety of sites of mix type on a single server.  But regardless of type the principles of content management remain the same:  content reusability through XML, repurposability through standard templates (XSL, Freemarker), content staging, in-context preview, versioning, site versioning and rollback, deployment, de-coupled authoring and delivery, workflow, links management, etc. etc.  Here is where we put our emphasis to make a product that sets what we hope to be a new standard for dynamic, interactive websites.

The web site framework is a sample site - an example only - of how one can use forms and templates.  It is in no way intended to represent any preferred model of development, even more so because the current version of WSF is not yet updated to leverage 2.1.0 web scripts, which are the basis for our component development and page publishing model moving forward.

We will be working this September on a vastly improved set of examples and tutorial and simple sample sites.  I think the gap you are highlighting is more one of rich out of the box default site publishing framework, which is what most standard open source CMSes provide.  For us, this is a question of a couple of weeks of documentation and examples; unlike other open source products, that sample framework isn't the only framework that can be supported to lock your site design and development activities done into a single constrained model.

I would encourage you to dig deeper into how we support the core services of content management - aside from richer samples, the underlying set of capabilities exceeds what you would get from many of the commercial systems at great cost, including an Interwoven, Vignette, Day, RedDot, and more.


Kevin