If I thought COTS would do the job, I probably would have considered it. But, alas, it doesn’t.
There is no reason I can’t make a “home rolled” solution work, I just need some advice on getting out of the corner I feel like I have painted myself into.
Debbie
COTS?
There is no reason I can’t make a “home rolled” solution work, I just need some advice on getting out of the corner I feel like I have painted myself into.
That wheel you have invented is kind of cool, but I recommend you chip off the corners to make it more round. 
I guess this process of getting out of corners is what CMS devs have gone through to get their finished product. But I admire your dedication to rolling your own, as it’s no doubt a great learning experience. It does sound like you just need to tweak your navigation a bit to achieve what you want, but I don’t know the whole picture.
Code Off The Shelf
Oh, sorry, I forgot they probably don’t have that “Down Under” yet… 
Come on, Ralph, catch up with the times…
Common (or Commercial) Off The Shelf (COTS) software
That wheel you have invented is kind of cool, but I recommend you chip off the corners to make it more round.
Ha ha.
Actually, what I have built is superior to some pre-packed things, and it does nearly everything I wanted it to. Unfortunately, I kinda screwed up on not better merging my Web-Design with my Content. (And, once again, they did match back in 2011 and 2012. It is just that in the last 9 months my creativity has exploded and that is when everything went to hell?!)
I guess this process of getting out of corners is what CMS devs have gone through to get their finished product. But I admire your dedication to rolling your own, as it’s no doubt a great learning experience. It does sound like you just need to tweak your navigation a bit to achieve what you want, but I don’t know the whole picture.
I am wondering if my questions would have been better suited in the “Web Design” forum? (It seems like my problem is part “Web Design” considerations and part “Web Content” considerations?!)
As far as Content goes, here are two questions that I have this morning…
Topic #1:
Is it better to have a website that is “Shallow” (i.e. Many Sections and Links available in broad daylight), OR which is “Deep” (Few broad Sections displayed, and then lots of “drilling-down” to get to the Specific Content)
Like most things, it would see having a balance is the best.
Topic #2:
Another topic that I seem to be running into with Content is a lack of “uniformity” and “specificity”.
Some topics are very b-r-o-a-d (e.g. “Legal”) and other topics are much more specific (e.g. “Famous Entrepreneurs” or “Online Businesses”).
The problem is that each of these are things I want to show people and catch their attention. It would make sense to have a navigation tab called “Legal” - along with “Management”, “Operations”, “Finance”, but then there are specific topics that I want to advertise and get people’s attention on such as “Entrepreneur Interviews” or “Tax Tips”.
If I insisted on having “symmetry”, then I would have a few major Sections (e.g. Finance, Legal, Management, Operations, Misc), and then force people to drill down to…
Finance > Accounting > Taxes
Management > Famous People > Entrepreneurs > Interviews
Legal > Business Types > Online Businesses
My argument is “Sometimes you need an ‘Express Lane’ to the ‘Good Stuff’…”
But then the questions becomes “How do you cut up the hog?!”
Sincerely,
Debbie
Yes, you definitely don’t want it off yourself. 
Is it better to have a website that is “Shallow”
Probably yes, but you have to be practical, I guess, as too many shallow links could be overwhelming. That’s why I like the idea of grouping content into quite separate topics, so that a user can easily filter out a lot of irrelevant stuff in one click.
As I said above, you can use the home page to feature a lot of inner content, even if with a kind of site map below the main menu, or feature boxes, perhaps in a slider.
Just get the site online and submit it for a Sitepoint Review.
Hah!
Probably yes, but you have to be practical, I guess, as too many shallow links could be overwhelming. That’s why I like the idea of grouping content into quite separate topics, so that a user can easily filter out a lot of irrelevant stuff in one click.
All true, except my problem is that even doing that, I feel like I have many more “broad” Sections than a simple newspaper with: Local, National, Finance, Sports, Lifestyles, Want Ads.
(I went out yesterday and bought a 3-ring binder and loose-leave paper, and plan on filling up my table with LOTS of lists and diagrams and relationships and notes in an attempt to come up with an over-arching “Information Architecture” and see if I can do what you are saying and combine things into fewer “buckets”. Of course if it was so easy, I would have never posted here!!)
As I said above, you can use the home page to feature a lot of inner content, even if with a kind of site map below the main menu, or feature boxes, perhaps in a slider.
True.
So you didn’t respond to my question yesterday about whether is was “good” or “bad” to add an extra page people have to click through…
Image if you had to navigate through this to get to an article…
Scenario #1:
On Home Page
>Click on Finance tab
>Land on Finance home page
Click on Taxes link
Land on Taxes home page
Click on “Why to Hire a CPA”
Read Article
Versus this…
Scenario #2:
On Home Page
Click on Taxes tab
Land on Taxes home page
Click on “Why to Hire a CPA”
Read Article
Also, what about my “Multi-Dimensional Content” post?
As an end-user, would you rather have things lumped into ONE Section (e.g. “Legal”), or would you like a website that is “cross-referenced” where you can find the article “Benefits of becoming an S-Corp” under both the main Section: “Legal” and also under another Section: “Business-Types”
I am all for SIMPLICITY, but at the same time, one of the key benefits of computers is the ability to “slice and dice” information…
Thoughts?
Sincerely,
Debbie