For better managing your custom design website, there are two types of Content Management Systems that you can choose from: the paid CMS and the open source CMS that you can have for free.

There isn't necessarily any best CMS in the online world today, there are only popular Content Management Systems. Here are some of them:

• Drupal

Drupal would seem to be one of the more advanced open source CMS available for download today. Being open source, thousands of people contribute to its development, and you will find no trouble at all finding a web programmer who knows Drupal, or finding a community of programmers who can troubleshoot your Drupal CMS just in case.

• MamboServer

Mambo is another popular open source CMS that is free for downloading and extremely easy to set up. Its main edge is that its system is scalable and you can actually incorporate it into the whole spectrum of custom web site design - from the really simple sites to the large company-owned sites. You can use Mambo to manage your advertisements or syndicate your content, among other things.

• Open CMS

• Joomla!

• Typo3

Typo 3 is another of those open source systems, although it is designed more for enterprise-level applications like corporate intranet. It addresses issues like branding, version control and maintaining templates in an application.

In choosing which content management system to incorporate to your website, regardless if it's free or open source, one of the key things to keep consider are your custom web design needs, and nothing else.

Let's begin with a little history. Many years ago, when the web was up and coming and you needed to be on it, I paid someone to build a site for me. Afterwards, I could say, "Yeah, I have a site, go to -" and then I would name my site a feel a hit of pride. I'd also get satisfaction when my webmaster (if you could call him that; I don't know that I would in retrospect, but that's another story) occasionally forwarded me an email of an interested visitor. My satisfaction was short-lived, as you might imagine. I soon began to understand the power of the web and found the sad reality that my "webmaster" was getting all my emails from my website visitors to be annoying. I had him change this so that the emails came to me. He charged me a one-time fee for getting him to do this.

Okay, so these days it is not quite that bad, is it? Your webmaster or whoever is doing the "web thing" for you isn't charging you for every little service? Excuse me. I'll reserve my rant for another article, or possibly a blog entry.

So anyway, I fired my webmaster. I built my own webpage. I did this - of all things - with Microsoft Publisher. Yeah, well, it worked - in that I was able to build a site and, with some effort, get it on the web. I won't go into why you shouldn't try this, kids, at home. I was at home when I tried it, sure. But I don't suggest building a site with Publisher. It can be done, but don't do it.

One thing that happens - talk about annoying: The site crams all against the left side of the page. There's nothing you can do to change that. You might as well type out onto the web page "Look, Ma, I can create a website using Publisher." Don't do it.

Well, I knew at the time I shouldn't be messing around with Publisher. It's great for putting together a book or something for print. It's not good for websites. I had just been so excited because I had created a downloadable book for lulu.com. Publisher was great for laying out a book. I had so much momentum...

I put the Publisher site up, and thought I had done a pretty good job, considering that everything was crammed up to the left of the screen. I had yet to become a blogger, and I had yet to realize the importance of tagging and so on. All that important "extra" stuff. I'm joking. Writing tags is not extra. It's essential. So is the blog - on the website.

Then I bought FrontPage and a book and... That's all she wrote. I learned FrontPage and I haven't tried anything else out since. Why not? So far I don't need to use the fantastic Dreamweaver that everyone talks about. Oh, I can't do Flash on FrontPage? Uh - yes you can. Easily.

I continue to believe that content is all-important. Not bells. Not whistles. Content. I don't care what kind of a site you are putting up. Well, okay, I wouldn't necessarily use FrontPage for every circumstance. But for you and me, the individual or small company that wants to be up and shining on the web, FrontPage is the clear answer. At least it was for me. As I say, I haven't looked back since.

One needn't learn the bells and whistles. One certainly needn't incorporate dhtml or whatever that code is that will make letters pop and fly about. Old browsers can't see it, and new browsers - mine, at least - don't want to see it.

I have affiliated with companies. That is, I've tried to turn a dollar by putting them up on my site, a link or banner or what have you. Let me say that what I don't like are the banners that flicker and blink and all that junk. If I want the Las Vegas experience, I'll go there.

Just give me content. FrontPage can handle that and handle it well. You want to be able to upload Flash, for sure. FrontPage can do it. You want to be able to get as much information on your website with as few bytes as possible. FrontPage can do this as well as any program. So, I'm happy. Are you happy - yet?

Some working knowledge of J2EE or JSF is assumed for this article.

Like some of you I've been frustrated with this technology known as JSF or Java Server Faces. There are several different flavors out there that are built on the shoulders of JSF. For instance Oracle's ADF (Application Development Framework). Oracle ADF Faces Components is a set of over a 100 JSF components that let you build a richer user interface for your Java EE applications. Oracle ADF Faces also includes many of the framework features most needed by JSF developers today.

That is great, and in many ways it will make life easier to develop in a JSF environment. Some items you will find available in these "add on" packages have a real benefit. For instance, as of the date of this article, I was very surprised that a File Upload is a feature still not implemented in JSF in respect to using natural jsf tags. There are ways to accomplish this task in JSF but they are not native JSF approaches. The process is a "no brainer" in just about every other framework available today, including asp.net.

Another simple task (I thought) was having a data table present the results of a query in an editable format. Possibly to update a user record or shopping cart. After working in other technologies it was very efficient to return a result set to a data table object and let that object take care of some of the trivial behaviors and characteristics of the table itself. When I started exploring JSF I was frequently and at every turn becoming more and more frustrated in trying to duplicate some of the most basic of processes similar to managing records through data tables.

There are not a whole lot of resources out there yet on JSF although it is growing steadily, and I found that all too often the resources that I was finding on the internet either didn't apply to the more simple tasks or the information was just completely wrong. One example of that was that it was stated in one article I read that you cannot use command buttons inside of a JSF data table. The recommendation was to use JSF hyperlinks instead when trying to perform an action from a data table due to a bug in the framework that prevented command button actions to fire if the button resided inside of a data table.

At first I thought "you've got to be kidding me"! Then I remembered that I've been finding a fair amount of "bogus" information in regards to JSF development so I decided to do further research and discovered that information to be less than accurate as well.

I simply had to find a way to populate a data table through a result set and get a command button to fire an action and pass all of the data in the data table to the backing bean to update the record. Multiple command buttons would exist as well as hidden fields pertaining to id numbers and so forth. Pretty basic stuff and we've all done it before with relative ease.

It turned out that the solution was in fact a simple one. "Binding". You've heard about it and read about it. But this approach was something a little different as far as I could find.

Many of the blogs and articles that I read dealt with passing the values as parameters and following the steps to define the parameters in faces.config files etc., then retrieving the parameters in a backing bean. Processing the passed data required another set of procedures to utilize mapping to each of the field parameters passed and then processing could begin.

That seemed like a whole heck of a lot to me just to retrieve form data. Then it occurred to me that I should be able to "bind" a text field component on a page to a backing bean. Once it is bound then all I have to do is extract the data. And that's all there is to it. My query returned results and pre-populated a data table including text fields with the values of the query pre-populated in the text fields.

Each one of those text fields was bound to a "HtmlInputText" type in my backing bean. It was not a String type like other approaches define. Doing that does require you to map parameters and populate that String variable through your set methods once the form is submitted.

What I found is that if I bind my text field to a property of text field type that it solved my problem of passing values from a data table, and I didn't have to define parameter fields anywhere in any xml file. Now that I had that figured that out I needed to figure out how to get the value of that property that I've bound my form field to, well why not getValue()?

I personally hadn't seen any examples online or in books for retrieving the value from a form binding it to the type of form element it was and simply use the getValue() to pull out the value of the object. Used like this getParameterFromForm().getValue().

Let me clarify that I am NOT saying that trying this approach isn't documented anywhere, I find it hard to believe that I've had some stroke of genius that no one has had before in the world of java, especially since I'm coming from .NET and ColdFusion.

After doing that I no longer had any problems passing form data to my backing bean. I was able to dynamically populate data tables with any number of records including any number of command buttons within that data table and I didn't have to concern myself with remembering to define parameters in any other areas of the application.

So put simply you can bind your form fields to properties of the same type in your backing bean, and then extract the value of that object using getValue() if you prefer over utilizing parameter string mapping and similar approaches for processing form data. I found it to be easier and less time consuming which has costs associated to it as well.