Skip to content

As we’ve organized and executed web design and development projects for our client-partners at the LBJ Presidential Library, DiscoverLBJ digital archives, and the Clinton Digital Library, we are often asked about the best content management systems (CMS) to use for large, digital archives.

U.S. presidential libraries, like those maintained by our clients, often hold millions of physical and digital documents and multimedia files that must be catalogued in ways that conform to the metadata standards for the National Archives’ catalog, so they can be easily retrieved by the individuals seeking them, including library archivists, researchers, and journalists. Digital archives benefit from content management systems that offer these functional attributes:

  1. Ease of Use
  2. Front-end Display Flexibility
  3. Scalability
  4. Organizational and Metadata Capabilities
  5. Robust Search and Faceting Capabilities
  6. Online Exhibit Functionality
  7. Accessibility
  8. Community Support
  9. Long-term Maintenance

Our design and development teams have worked with two popular CMS platforms for digital archive management: Omeka and Drupal. While both compete in all nine of the above categories, the best platform for your project likely depends on the size of your digital archive and the technical expertise of your management team.

In this article, we provide a side-by-side comparison of each software product, using the above categories as filters through which we evaluate and score the platforms.

Omeka vs. Drupal

1. Ease of Use

Omeka has been designed with non-technical users in mind and offers an intuitive user interface that caters to archivists, librarians, and historians without advanced web development skills. It has a “plug-and-play” approach and features straightforward workflows for uploading and organizing content. If you don’t have access to a web developer – and don’t require a lot of customization – Omeka Classic and its more scalable cousin, Omeka S, are a good choice for you.

Drupal comes with a steeper learning curve for non-technical web managers, but it also offers greater flexibility. Drupal’s content editing interface is improving with each new version of the software, but it still lags behind the simplicity of Omeka  in terms of ease of use. Non-technical editors can work effectively in the CMS once it’s configured, but you’ll need an experienced developer to handle initial set up and advanced customizations.

WINNER: OMEKA

If you don’t have regular access to a web developer to help with CMS customizations, we recommend Omeka for ease of use.


2. Front-end Display Flexibility

Omeka logo

The differences here are more defined: Omeka offers limited, out-of-the-box, front-end design flexibility. You’ll find a selection of themes that can be customized to a degree, but if you’re seeking specific or unique layouts, such as designs that match your organization’s branding, you’ll need the help of someone with advanced coding skills. 

Drupal

Drupal excels here and offers a robust theming system, along with a wide array of contributed design modules that will allow you to create highly customized page layouts and user journeys. Drupal features tools, such as Layout Builder and Paragraphs, that give non-technical users more control over page building. Developers can leverage Drupal’s flexibility to implement bespoke page designs and block-style components. 

Gold Trophy

WINNER: DRUPAL

Drupal takes this category hands down, offering greater front-end display flexibility.


3. Scalability

Omeka logo

While the original or “classic” version of Omeka is designed for single-site projects, Omeka S allows users to manage and share digital assets across multiple websites, so it provides scalability for organizations who need to coordinate multiple collections under a single umbrella. That said, Omeka S was primarily designed to support small to medium-sized archives and may not be the best choice for more substantial digital collections, like those of modern-day U.S. presidential libraries and museums.

Drupal

Scalability is one of Drupal’s strong points. Its modular architecture and robust performance optimization tools make it an excellent option for large-scale projects with millions of digital records and assets. An added benefit is Drupal’s ability to integrate with external systems and databases, further enhancing its scalability.

Gold Trophy

WINNER: DRUPAL

While both platforms offer scalability, we recommend Drupal for large digital archives.


4. Organizational and Metadata Capabilities

Omeka logo

Omeka’s key strength is its ability to manage metadata, and it natively supports Dublin Core, a strict metadata standard widely used by libraries and digital archives. Omeka also offers plugins for other metadata standards. Omeka S supercharges these capabilities by allowing linked data and resource sharing across websites.

Drupal

Drupal also has extensive metadata capabilities, but like many of its features, you’ll need customization (and developer support) to match the metadata management tools inherent in Omeka. Drupal achieves some parity through contributed modules, such as Schema.org, Metatag, or RDF extensions

Gold Trophy

WINNEROMEKA (with some exceptions)

Omeka’s built-in metadata features make it a more straightforward choice for digital archives that do not have developer support to customize functionality; however, Drupal is more robust and customizable for archives that do not conform to traditional metadata standards set by the National Archives and Records Administration. This may often be the case with older archives that predate digital records like email and other electronic records created during the administration.


Omeka logo

Omeka provides basic search functionality out of the box, with support for simple keyword searches. There’s a catch, though: Advanced search and faceting require additional plugins, such as Solr Search, which may require technical expertise to set up and configure.

Drupal

Drupal excels in search functionality, particularly with modules like SearchStax Studio, which allows for highly customized search experiences, faceted filtering, and indexing of large datasets. This makes Drupal a superior choice for archives of any size that need powerful search capabilities.

Gold Trophy

WINNER: DRUPAL

Drupal is the stronger choice for advanced search and faceting capabilities.


6. Online Exhibit Functionality

Omeka logo

Omeka was designed with exhibit-building in mind. The platform offers an Exhibit Builder plugin that enables archivists to create curated digital exhibits with narrative storytelling, making it ideal for cultural institutions and libraries.

Drupal

Drupal can support online exhibits, and requires custom development or contributed modules to achieve the same level of functionality as Omeka’s Exhibit Builder. With Drupal, thought, the sky’s the limit in terms of the types of exhibits you can build. So, even though it lacks the same kind of out-of-the-box exhibit-building tools as its competitor, Drupal enables site managers’ to fully leverage their imaginations when building online exhibit content.

Gold Trophy

WINNER: DRUPAL

Drupal is the better choice for organizations looking for maximum flexibility in how they build online exhibits.


7. Accessibility

Omeka logo

Omeka adheres to basic accessibility standards, and its themes are generally WCAG compliant. Achieving higher levels of accessibility often requires custom theme modifications and developer support.

Drupal

Drupal places a strong emphasis on accessibility, and many Drupal themes are designed with accessibility in mind, incorporating tools like automatic ARIA landmarks to improve usability. Its community of web developers and software engineers actively works to ensure core features meet WCAG guidelines. 

Gold Trophy

WINNER: DRUPAL

The fact that Drupal’s technical community makes accessibility a continued priority gives this platform the edge in this category.


8. Community Support

Omeka logo

Omeka’s developer community is small and highly focused on cultural heritage and archival use cases. Users can access forums, documentation, and plugins tailored to academic and archival needs. However, a smaller community means fewer resources compared to competitors which can result in unmaintained or outdated plugins.

Drupal

Drupal boasts one of the largest open-source communities, with thousands of developers and software engineers contributing to modules, themes, and support forums. This extensive community ensures ongoing improvements and a wealth of resources for troubleshooting and development.

Gold Trophy

WINNER: DRUPAL

There is strength in numbers – and the number of talented minds focused on making (and keeping) Drupal an ever-evolving platform is a perpetual asset.


9. Long-term Maintenance

Omeka logo

Omeka’s lightweight nature makes it easier to maintain. Platform updates are typically straightforward, and its plugins are designed for compatibility. However, Omeka may not keep up with the changing needs of a rapidly growing digital archive.

Drupal

Drupal’s long-term maintenance requires more effort, particularly for version upgrades. However, its robust community ensures regular updates and security patches. Drupal’s ability to adapt to new technologies makes it a solid choice for organizations planning for long-term growth.

Gold Trophy

WINNER: TIE

Omeka scores for ease of maintenance, and Drupal for agility and longevity.


Omeka vs. Drupal: What Would We Choose?

When you tally the scores (Omeka = 2, Drupal = 6, Tie = 1), you see that Drupal is the clear winner in a side-by-side comparison, especially for larger, digital archives with millions of records.

While our web design and development teams utilize both solutions for our presidential library clients, Drupal’s advantages made it the obvious choice for a large digital archives project we’ve undertaken. In future articles, we’ll share how that CMS implementation is going, as well as its impact on the digital archives’ functionality.

Conclusion

Choosing between Omeka and Drupal depends on the specific needs of your digital archive.

  • Omeka is ideal for smaller teams focused on metadata-rich collections and ease of use.
  • Drupal is suited for large-scale archives requiring extensive scalability, accessibility, and customization.

Ultimately, organizations should evaluate their technical resources (human and financial), long-term goals, and the specific requirements of their digital archive to make an informed decision. 

Need an experienced team to recommend the best CMS for your digital archive?

Complete the form below to schedule a consultation.

Cultivate

Join the Culture Foundry Community

Even if you’re not ready to make the leap yet, you’ll find our community to be a helpful source of key insights and advice to help you learn more about how to thrive in digital. All are welcome.

Join the Community