Have a new folder in an existing publication or create a new content publication for a new website?

Question

I have the customer who is creating a new website for a new brand. They told me "we will NOT use any XXX content or schema.", where xxx isthe current website (no the new one)

"In fact, the marketing team wants no connection between NNN and XXXX. It will be new schema and new content" NNN is the new company and XXX is the current

We have a content publication called "030 is for RBU CBU and SPBU master content" where we have all the content for the current company (XXX)

And the user is creating in this publication a folder called (NNN) to save all the component for the new company.

I'm trying to get them understand the benefits of create a new content publication as : "035 NNN master content"

But he said:"my preference is not to create new publications. First, we will have too many publication to manage and Second, it will be much easier to reuse content later"

But this second part is contrary and what he said at first "we will NOT use any XXX content or schema"

What is your oppinion? Can you help me give more example of what is better have a different content publication for a new website totally different of the current one (if they are not sharing any content or schemas)

In advance, thanks so much !!

Answer 1

From the description that you've given, I would suggest creating a new Publicstion.

As well as keeping things clean, and allowing simpler re-use in the future, this has other benefits, including:

1. It is simpler for content editors that only need to work in the new Publication

2. You'll probably have a simpler Tridion security model. For example, the same Group 'could' have different rights on the different Publications.

3. You do not need to share Keywords between the Content Publications - resulting in an awkward hierarchy to handle different sites and (possibly) more complex queries on the Content Delivery side.

4. You prevent content items from being incorrectly used on one of the other sites. For example, you may only have permissions (from a copyright perspective) to use an image on a single site.

5. Training and documentation are simpler, as you won't have to explain why the other content is there, and to (possibly) avoid it.

As Chris also suggests, I recommend that you get to the bottom of the business requirements and (possible) future needs before implementing this either way.

It can be tricky to unpick (or merge) content at a later date, so I'd suggest that you think about this as much as possible up front.

Hope this helps.

Answer 2

This is a very complex question, that has no easy answer. The decision to make publications vs content folders really depends on the individual business, processes and also perhaps Tridion license restrictions.

I would suggest you consult with an experienced Tridion consultant to fully understand your requirements and best design a blueprint to meet your current and future needs.

Based on your brief description, I would lean towards new publication, as you mention there is no overlap between the two companies and their content.

The main reason to create a separate publication is to separate concerns and make it as reusable as possible in the future for example mobile websites etc...

Answer 3

As long as you make sure that the new Publications you create are under the same 000 Empty Parent, then you can always merge them at a later stage. Merge as in put them closer to eachother, like make one a child of the other and have them both inherit from the same Schema Publication for example.

For the rest, to make a good decision on a BluePrint we usually sit in a workshop with the customer a few hours up to a day, not something that is easily answered based on the limited information given here unfortunately.

Answer 4

To strictly separate Schemas while re-using the content Publication:

• Use folder properties, optionally setting a mandatory Schema on each NNN folder.
• Place Schemas in (sub) folders with read removed for Groups that should not see the Schemas in the Schemas drop-down.

I understand the strong separation between brands and how the Content must differ. But I would explore the "separate Schemas" with "share later" requirements and confirm if Marketing is more interested in different branding or look-and-feel (i.e. design publications in Tridion concepts).

• The Tridion Reference Implementation, starts with a shared set of (semantic) Schemas where you could build upon a "good default." The same Schemas could support many websites and brands.
• As a non-Tridion example, blogs on Blogger or WordPress run on a few "definitions" (posts and pages) but can have wildly different presentations.

New Schemas aren't that bad, but common elements like headers, footers, banners, articles, and lists of links only have so many variations.

Also confirm:

• Will there be a new Schema Publication and if so, it must be a parent of the Content Publication (and will be shared with any child Publications)?
• New design publication?
• New website publication?

One big consideration is translation--additional content publications is easier with managed translation (Translation Manager integrations) or with fewer languages. But before recommending a new Publication confirm how doubling translation Publications, if needed, might impact the BluePrint.