Re: Linux users' expectations of online help

[Sean Wheller <seanwhe -at- yahoo -dot- com>]

--- "Eric J. Ray" <ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003, Sean Wheller wrote:
> I still think the issues of creating and viewing
> are being conflated. You can use *roff to _create_
> man pages (or SGML in some environments), but you
> use the man(1) command to view them.
> You use a text editor, Helen, RoboHelp, or whatever
> to create JavaHelp, but the JavaHelp viewer from
> Sun to view it.
> 
> Man pages don't usually even pretend to address GUI
> environments...they're obligatory for command line
> tools and interfaces, but not for GUIs.

OK. Agreed. Yes they are separate layers.
Hopefully, they will remain that way.

> The problems are orthogonal...man pages are just
> fine
> for a command line interface and a user who knows
> what
> do to with it, but they're kludgy and inappropriate
> for a GUI.

Yes. Most windows users have a heart attack when they
see MAN or INFO.
But to the Linux user, so long as the info is there,
they are happy.
I think the expectations are very different when it
comes to presentation requirements.

> That's _one_ perspective, but overlooks many other
> aspects of documentation needs. Yes, from a command
> line interface, man pages and HTML read via
> links/lynx
> is handy. Linux w/ Gnome/KDE, StarOffice, Mozilla,
> and the like is far more comparable to the Windows
> environment than a command line environment. In the
> full GUI world, man pages don't fly (yes, I'm
> familar
> with Xman, but it's an abomination).

Yes it does not answer all the needs. But MAN or INFO
under HTTP works well. It will not answer the
presentational expectations of Windows Users.

HTML/XHTML help such as that developed by KDE are a
closer step to the presentational requirements of the
Windows users.
KDE uses their own subset of Simplified Docbook to
produce the KDE application manuals.

> For example, I'm currently running a Linux distro
> on my laptop. I've yet to need to use the command
> line
> for anything...and I'm using my wireless LAN, VPN,
> Web browser, and everything else that one expects
> from
> a desktop system. If I need help, I'll expect to get
> it in a environment-appropriate means, and man pages
> aren't it. (If I need help at this zsh shell
> session,
> though, man pages will be fine.)

True. This is a problem. But as a Linux user you know
how to handle it. The Windows user will not. At least
until they become accustomed with Linux.

> 
> That's an interesting question...philosophically, I
> think that a non-structured tool does writers a
> disservice...a GUI (_not_ WYSIWYG) tool to manage
> XML/SGML would be a better thing, with appropriate
> hooks to pre/post processing scripts.

The problem for Windows based Authors is their
attachment to WYSIWYG. Most find it very difficult to
relinquish it.

The concept of Single-Source, IMHO, can only be truly
implemented when you separate the presentation from
the content. Tools like XXE (http://www.xmlmind.com)
are trying to address this problem with a QUASI
solution based on CSS. I on the other hand line source
editing and am comfortable in Emacs or VI. yet for
convenience I use the Oxygen XML Editor
(http://www.oxygenxml.com). It gives me the source
editing with buttons for quick access to the tool
chain.

Windows based Authors tend to feel more comfortable
using the WYSI One Option interface.

The problem is that it never gives the same freedom as
direct source editing.

Tools like XMetal and Morphon give multiple views
including source. EPIC is just to expensive for most
authors.

If Authors are to embrace the XML Authoring system.
Then a comfortable half way must be found. I think
that XXE has it right. But the app is not perfect. 

> Agreed...and I don't think it's necessary to expect
> proficiency at the command line for basic computer
> use. Given a decent GUI, a lot can be done easily,
> but when help is needed, it should be appropriate.

Yes. Command prompt should not be required. But if
you're on Linux, I don't think you can help but move
in that direction. Especially when you find it faster
that point and click.

Then again. Most of the Windows users I know work with
one hand on the mouse about 85% of the session.

> Yes, this I knew. I was actually speaking of the
> authoring
> experience...the last time I looked, emacs+pgsgml or
> vim
> with syntax highlighting was the best out there for
> an
> authoring environment. I'd like to see an
> Adept/Epic-like
> XML/SGML editor that provides some level of support
> for
> the non-Unix-geek author, including a screen FOSI to
> provide a comfortable environment. Frankly, I think
> that
> it'd be popular in the Linux community in general...
> although links works pretty well for web browsing, I
> find that most Linux users tend to prefer the polish
> of
> Mozilla. For authoring, I suspect the same might be
> true.
> 
You will be surprised. A number of tools now support
XML Editing. Even KATE has a plug-in. Emacs + psgmls
is still the Linux users favorite. But then to the
Linux user emacs is email, editor, calculator and the
kitchen sink.:-)

The Windows user will not work with such a tool.

Yet I do think that Authors should learn Linux and
most definitely, regardless of OS learn XML. Since MS
canned Help 2.0 and ditched ASP.NET help they have
announced a project called Longhorn. This will be a
new Help system. One of the base components is
Docbook. This makes sense since practically every MS
product now includes support for or uses XML.

Will the Windows users information requirements remain
the same? I think that they will. They are accustomed
to having a much higher level of information. Not all,
but a large part of the Linux documents are not
explicit. they give you a hint and you often will
search around to get the full picture. But Linux users
don't mind. I'm not sure that Windows users will be so
patient.

Sean Wheller

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

NEED TO PUBLISH YOUR FRAMEMAKER CONTENT ONLINE?
?Mustang? (code name) is a NEW online publishing tool for FrameMaker that
lets you easily single-source content to Web, intranets, and online Help.
The interface is designed for FrameMaker users, so there is little or no
learning curve and no macro language required! See a live demo that
will take your breath away: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l3

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.