Now, unlike HTML Help, and WinHelp before it, Vista Help will allow application developers to integrate their help with that of Windows, Microsoft programs, and indeed every other application on the PC. All of the help for the system will be accessed through a single (undockable) pane, at the right of the screen. "Allow" might not be the right word here: "force" might be better.
Vista Help will be based on MAML (Microsoft Assistance Markup Language), an XML-based language that uses pre-defined schemas to describe various types of content – FAQ, concept, glossary, and so on – and that will separate content from presentation, to allow consistency across applications.
It will also provide support for active content: the help system will be able to communicate with the PC and provide help that's relevant to your system state (do you have a printer connected? are you a local administrator?).
Additionally, it has built-in support for partial and pushed updates, so you can get some updated user assistance without needing to replace your whole help system, and as a user you don't need to know anything about it.
So is Microsoft's vision right here? They say that they have worked intensively with the Help-authoring community to provide what authors want, and I have no reason to disbelieve them. From speaking to other authors over the past few months though, I'm not sure that they've come up with answer.
- Do users want all their help (for Word, PhotoShop, Norton AntiVirus, Freeware text editor, ADSL modem, etc ...) to be in one single pane? Will this make it easier for them to find what they want?
- As an information developer, is it desirable to target content at MAML if you ever want to use the content for anything else? Is there a need for a proprietary format here?
- Are Microsoft really capable of mapping every possible document format in their schemas? Can developers and authors not be trusted to understand the structure of their information better than Microsoft?
- Are the new features (active content, and so on) compelling enough to encourage developers to switch to Vista Help?
The way I've phrased this is all quite negative, but the truth is that I don't know. I'm dubious about whether lumping all the help together – without allowing individual software development teams to decide if that is desirable or not – is going to do more good than harm. I'm unconvinced on the benefits of MAML, of the restricted schemas, and of the USP of Vista Help, but as nobody has seen it yet (and MS are keeping pretty schtum) it's really too early to comment.
The rigid structure that seems to underlie Vista Help does concern me though – there's a lot of "Microsoft decides", which experience tells me is likely to cause difficulty and frustration sooner rather than later.
I guess the biggest disappointment is that this was an opportunity to do something really great and push the whole sphere of user assistance onto another plane, and it doesn't seem to have been taken. In my view, user assistance should be moving ever more in the direction of providing guidance at the point of need, through dynamic embedded help, and I don't see how Vista Help fits into this picture.
I've heard people be negative about Vista Help, and I've heard them be guarded. I haven't heard anyone be enthusiastic yet. I'd love to know what people think, hope, and fear.
It's surprisingly hard to find information on Vista Help, but here are some links I know of – if you know of more, I'd like to hear about those too.An introduction to 'Longhorn' Help, by Tony Self
Microsoft's introduction to Vista Help (still called Longhorn here)
Microsoft Assistance Platform blog
A post on the CherryLeaf blog, with a brief description of Vista Help, and a screenshot
0 comments:
Post a Comment