The appropriate CMS must provide solutions to
comply with these exemplarily specified
requirements or work against them.
The simplest solution to fulfil these requirements
would be the setup of an independent mobile
platform which would be suitable for most mobile
terminals. In this case, complex images, diagrams,
animations or style sheets would not be used. A
further possibility is the use of separate style sheets
that enables the mobile device to load the particular
mobile style sheet (handheld) and thus to form the
web page for mobile devices. Through the use of the
command “display:none” in the style sheet, the
device is given the possibility not to load images and
content in general. However, in praxis this approach
was not approved. Frequently this indication is
ignored by the mobile device and the conventional
screen style sheet is loaded.
The most mature solution at present is the use of
multi template output, or generic template output.
The page is then adapted to the respective device at
run-time.
The correct recognition whether and which
mobile device requests the page is a needed
requirement.
Three possibilities exist for the recognition:
Recognition by the user agent included in the
mobile browser smaller displays
Recognition of the mobile device through the
URI to the UAProf of the mobile device
which is sent by the device included in the
request of the page
By user decision
The recommendation is the combination of
several possibilities, enabling the user to choose
between a specially modified page for mobile
devices or the conventional page. The CMS
recognises the mobile device by user agent or
UAProf and provided a modified page for mobile
devices. In this page, it offers the user the change to
the conventional web page.
Common to all solutions, the XHTML mobile
profile (XHMTL MP) should be supported. XHTML
MP is a superset of the XHTML basis standard that
defines the requirements for pages to adapt to
mobile devices.
4.4 Selection of Possible CMS
In the study for the health insurance company four
CMSs were taken into closer consideration.
4.4.1 eWeb
eWeb is a closed source system by the eCONNEX
AG and is already in use in the company. Choosing
eWeb would save training costs and avoid media
breaks. However, multi template output is not
featured by the product which is to be rated as a
disadvantage. Therefore, other CMSs were taken
into closer consideration.
4.4.2 Typo3
Typo3 is an advanced content management system
on open source basis. In the internet community, it is
widely used and due to its ability of workflow
automation, user rights assignment and the multi site
management it is also used by professionals.
Because of the popularity of Typo3, extensions for
the recognition of mobile devices already exist. A
disadvantage is the enormous training effort for
customizing.
4.4.3 Joomla
The CMS Joomla is due to its easy handling very
popular. Possibilities to recognise mobile devices
already exist. However, the range of features does
not match up to the professionalism of Typo3.
4.4.4 Wap2Go
Wap2Go is an extension of the CMS PHPNuke.
With the goal of providing content of PHP Nuke
sites for mobile users, Wap2Go creates an advanced
impression. For example the format of images
(PNG, JPG, GIF) can be selected or deactivated.
However, several unsettled issues exist, therefore a
professional use would be problematic. It is not -
known whether device recognition is featured. Also
the source code is only developed and maintained by
one single developer which is to be seen as a risk.
4.4.5 Recommendation
The authors recommend a further examination of
Typo3, especially the training effort. If this effort is
acceptable for the company, the use of Typo3 for the
mobile web presence is recommended. The decision
is mainly based on the presence of device
recognition and multi site management.
Once the training for the open source system is
successfully accomplished, a second step could be
the migration of the existing web presence from
eWeb to Typo3.
HEALTHINF 2009 - International Conference on Health Informatics
120