Contents of Issue
|
This issue of the newsletter contains the following articles:
|
|
|
The Wars Continue |
If you received our post card of apology a few weeks ago, you know that the newsletter's still alive ... just very late. That we've been extremely busy is our problem, not yours. (We're not complaining; we like it in that briar patch.) On the other hand, how we've been busy might interest you, because it has ramifications for the content of this newsletter. Bill has been to, and spoken at, conferences; and we've both had assignments on the anti-Microsoft side of the fence. The experiences reinforce what we've been saying all along about the Hypertext Wars, and we plan to elaborate on the theme in this issue. It's turning out that the content of the newsletter is more managerial than technical. This has been a year of great change; and when we planned and wrote each issue, decision-making seemed more pressing than mastering technical topics like frames vs. secondary windows, the .png graphics format, or file compilation and compression. [Besides, our first degrees were in education and English/journalism, respectively, and we'll probably always be generalists at heart.] Our natural inclinations aside, the importance of making good decisions has only increased. Project managers and clients have to decide what, when, and how to publish; and technical writers have to chart their careers. Some of these decisions may require technical understanding, but they are rarely dominated by technical minutiae. So, for this issue we've decided to survey the landscape under four headings: The Players, The Rules, The Tools, and Our Best Guesses. Because we're late, we're merging issue 2:2 (Q2, May) with 2:3 (Q3, August). Merging the issues and covering the topic in any detail will run us to six pages. We'll try to put the newsletter online in time for issue 2:4 (Q4, November). There will be an HTML version, certainly; but because WinHelp 4's indexing is so much more sophisticated than HTML's, we may produce in both formats. S&C no longer supports WinHelp 3. If you have any comments (and we want very much to hear them), please email them to Bill Sanders (bsanders@scribble-count.com).
|
|
|
|
It's Microsoft vs. 3, 3½, or 4 opponents, depending whether you want to include the ambivalent IBM and/or the clueless Department of Justice (DoJ); for very different reasons, neither of them currently rates more than half a point as a Gates opponent. [Note: Written before IBM got off the fence, the DoJ changed its tactics, and Compaq acquired a new perspective along with its purchase of Digital; the first two will now be effective in their opposition, and Compaq may have taken IBM's spot on the fence.] Here's our take. | |||
Microsoft |
Due more to mismanagement by his opponents than inherent superiority of his operating systems, Gates subdued both the Mac and OS/2. If he's more worried about Java than either of the other two, he should be; the opposition's far more competent this time. It has been suggested that, even though Microsoft produces VB and Visual C++, Gates would would be willing to limit them in order to make Java the pre-eminent programming language; that way it never gets to operating system level. The operating system is the gateway, and so that's the bottom line: Active-X vs JavaScript; emasculating Java with J++, stonewalling the W3C for more than a year; locking out Netscape -- those are just tactics in the larger war. The realization that operating system hegemony is fundamental, makes a lot of other things clear. |
||
Netscape |
Their code's free, their help system's defunct; why are they still a player? Making the code accessible may increase their value to the coalition by encouraging experimentation; it's a gamble, but it might work. Their virtual abandonment of NetHelp won't have much negative impact; as we mentioned in issue 1:2 (Q4, 1997), NetHelp and JavaHelp were extremely compatible. [Note: Written before Sun and AOL divvied up the pie.] | ||
Sun |
JavaHelp's "Early Access" (Microsoft's premature releases have given the term "ßeta" a bad name) is available at //java.sun.com/jdc, and ver. 1.0 will be released this year (see "The Rules", next section). Their alliance with Oracle is solid, and they are doing a great deal behind the scenes to "Stop Bill". In fact, they're offering free assistance to any credible software house trying to put a viable pure Java product online. They've also instituted a certification program to ensure that a platform is completely compliant, and that a s/w product is 100% pure Java. The program is so rigorous that even JavaHelp hasn't passed it yet, although certification is imminent. |
||
Oracle |
Oracle has come out with Oracle Help for Java (see "The Rules", next section), ostensibly to accommodate the unique features of its databases. Some have questioned their project, but we don't: Oracle's needs really are unique; they want to be seen as a player in their own right; and Sun should welcome a reliable ally performing slightly different experiments on a common theme. Oracle has decided to support XML with a front-end query. | ||
IBM |
They seem to want it both ways (the only participant who does). They're working with Sun on a Java O/S project, and they've been allied with Microsoft on several smaller tasks. They're also adding an XML front end.
|
||
Dept. of Justice (DoJ) |
A list of all the things the Justice Dept. could get Microsoft for wouldn't fit in this expanded issue. But going after Gates just because he had the vision to integrate telecommunications and information gathering is barking up the only wrong tree in the forest. Such action will result either in letting him off the hook or in stifling progress. Either way, we users lose. (Fortunately, recent news indicates that the DoJ may be broadening its probe to more winnable issues.) If nothing else, the DoJ can tarnish Microsoft's aura of invincibility.
|
|
|
|
SGML, HTML, DHTML, XML, proprietary: why are there so many standards?; why can't people just choose? Answer: The proliferation is due to a variety of needs, frantic experimentation, and the profit motive. Natural selection will win out ... eventually. After each description below, we provide sources: most are neutral, a few favorable; we couldn't find any truly negative sites -- only snide, passing swipes. (Note: The URLs worked when this was originally published.) |
|||
SGML |
The parent (1985) of current markup languages, and an ISO standard, it is used by many large companies. It's powerful; but it's too difficult, expensive, and slow for this mass movement. It's users are as big and slow as it is, and their deep pockets have extended its longevity. But its ponderous structure gave us standards, which XML has benefited greatly from. Adobe is among the majors supporting SGML (with a well-hyped frame-to-SGML conversion project, for example) as well as their own Acrobat (described under "Proprietary", in this section, below).
|
||
HTML |
Ver. 3.2 is the accepted standard. 4.0 has been released, but nearly every vendor claiming to support it either doesn't yet support it fully or pirates in proprietary extensions that hold you hostage if you don't prune them out ruthlessly. Publishing in "vanilla" HTML is one of two relatively risk-free interim solutions; see "Our Best Guesses" (below).
|
||
DHTML |
This is HTML for dynamically updated presentations; but it also speeds up the display of complex pages (although S&C hasn't tested the extent to which this occurs). If you need DHTML, you know probably at least a little about it (and can find more from the sources listed below); if not, you probably don't. Some suggest that the better aspects of HTML 4 (cascading style sheets, for example), the dynamic aspects of DHTML, and XML's simplification of SGML would make a great state-of-the-art hypertext standard. One major sticking point is what script you use to implement the dynamism: Active-X or JavaScript. Can you say "Hypertext Wars"?
|
||
XML |
90% of SGML at less than half the corporate budget outlay, a cost/benefits trade-off that may make it the eventual winner. Like SGML, it defines each document at the beginning - but it doesn't do so as tediously. More robust and more difficult than HTML, it is slightly less flexible and much less difficult than SGML. Progress began in earnest late last year when Sun and Microsoft agreed to shelve, temporarily, their disagreements. Both IBM and Oracle have announced plans to add an XML-compatible front end to some or all of their databases to support queries and output.
|
||
Java-based Help (JavaHelp & Oracle Help) |
Java software runs slowly, but it's getting faster. JavaHelp and Oracle Help are in cahoots; NetHelp, of course, is now defunct. A drawback to either JavaHelp or Oracle Help becoming the online publishing standard is that both are still primarily context-sensitive help systems; they are far behind Microsoft in the transition to stand-alone hypertext. JavaHelp is available in stable ßeta; ver. 1.0 will ship after the development kit does (late Q3?) and only as an option. Java-based solutions are completely portable only on platforms that support what is called a Java Virtual Machine (VM) or a Java Runtime Engine (JRE); see "Sun" under "The Players", above, for a description of the certification process.
|
||
WinHelp |
Don't forget WinHelp and HTMLHelp. WinHelp is no longer sexy (though we writers recall the halcyon days when ver. 4 was); but it's clean, mean, robust, reliable, and fast. Its bugs are known and, for the most part, workable. Development of HTMLHelp has slowed while Microsoft evaluates it after Ralph Walden's retirement, but they're committed - absolutely committed - to its development. If you're completely Windows-based, using WinHelp 4 (and 3 if you have to support Windows 3.x) is a conservative position. Using HTMLHelp/font> is (for now) a moderate choice; it will soon be completely safe. WinHelp will be supported in at least the successor to Win98/NT5 -- if you need it that long.
|
||
Propri-
|
These can be fairly accurately divided into database mining standards (which almost have to be proprietary, since the databases are); HTML modified by a vendor; and PDF. We know little about the database eccentricities; are puzzled by the insistence of some tools (FrontPage and ColdFusion come to mind) to intrude just enough unique features to make them incompatible on any but their own servers; and are watching with interest Acrobat's development as a print-online hybrid.
|
|
|
Unless you want to work in an ASCII text editor, you need an authoring tool. There are three main groups of tools:
|
|||||||
WinHelp & HTML Tools |
Up to now, WinHelp has had more features than HTML: popups, searching, nested indexing, embedded windows, etc. (In fact, Microsoft's ex-head of development, Ralph Walden, repeatedly chided WinHelp authors for their refusal to let him drop any of the features he'd provided in WinHelp4, claiming that this delayed his release of HTMLHelp by at least a year.) So it's not surprising that the tools coming from the WinHelp camp (such as Doc-To-Help, ForeHelp, and RoboHELP) are extremely sophisticated and powerful. The majors have a proven commitment to hypertext and (particularly RH and D2H) have pockets deep enough to withstand the current time of troubles. All have well-defined and workable RTF-to-HTML migration plans.
|
||||||
Pure HTML Tools |
These are a diverse bag: semi-WYSIWYG, HTML-WYSIWYG, and non-HTML-WYSIWYG. The differences are significant.
Semi-WYSIWYG: Makes writing HTML text much easier, and switches quickly to a virtual copy of your default browser. Examples: HomeSite, HotDog Pro. HTML-WYSIWYG: Produces HTML behind the scenes while presenting you with a word processor interface. Examples: FrontPage, PageMill. Non-HTML-WYSIWYG: Produces something other than HTML behind the scenes while presenting you with a WYSIWYG interface, then compiles into HTML. Tends to be more proprietary. ColdFusion, NetObjects Fusion. Both of us prefer Semi-WYSIWYG, though Marci began with HTML-WYSIWYG, a common transition. We aren't familiar enough with the non-HTML to evaluate it or the contenders in it.
|
||||||
Propri- |
These include Acrobat and task-specific tools (particularly those for database mining). If your knowledge of hypertext is basic (if a newsletter like this is the upper bound of your hypertext reading, for example), you may be ready for Acrobat, but not for most task-specific tools.
|
|
|
|
Some very hesitant conclusions: |
|
Microsoft vs. "The Alliance" |
The opponents are serious; this is a battle over the operating system that accesses the greatest source of power we've ever created: information. No titans in history have fought over more. True, there will be enough cease-fire zones and compromises in the various battles to ensure that data exchange won't grind to a halt; but if you want platform portability that includes Windows, practice minimalism. In particular, learn to recognize every proprietary extension that you might encounter so that you can avoid them. |
Future Consensus |
The $64 question, but really a corollary to the item above. Gates doesn't compromise out of altruism; so if the DoJ doesn't cut him down (and we hope they don't on the grounds they've charted so far), and if the Alliance doesn't gain parity (not so bad, from our perspective), we don't know when the Hypertext Wars will end. It's really only a theatre in the war over operating system hegemony. |
Spin |
Each vendor will assure you that HTML 4.0 (or Java, or whatever) is compatible with their product X, but that does not mean that their product X is fully compatible with HTML 4.0 (or whatever). Confused? They want you to be. The W3C should know; they certify both HTML and XML. The same is true of Java's portability; because of some vendors' outrageous claims, Sun has had to institute a certification process to restore confidence. |
Tool Vendors |
We like the ex-WinHelp camp -- but that's what we know best. If you want straight HTML, pick a semi-WYSIWYG; you'll learn HTML better and have more control over your product. There are no tested tools yet for XML. SGML and most proprietary tools require a lot of experience; if you have it you should know that you do. |
Best Decisions Now |
Depends on your situation:
|
Ultimate Future |
Very rosy -- and in your own lifetime, if you're young enough. Some day, life will be sweet again. In the meantime, think of the experience as enriching, not aggravating. |
|
|
|
Note: |
Any Calendar that has found its way to the Archive section of our Website is dated: single events have passed and/or ongoing events may have changed; URLs may also be outdated. For current events, see the latest newsletter. |
|
October 7-9. Mixed Platform Publishing Conference. San Diego. (www.publish.com/connections) October 15-18. STC Region 7 Conf. Denver. (www.stcrmc.org/region7/) Bill speaks (on hypertext, of course) Fri. morn., 10/16. [Note: The papers that were presented have finally been taken off the Website, but you can still get Bill's (handout (291K)) in the S&C Archive.] November 1-4. Info Online 98. Chicago. (www.helpuniversity.com or www.influent.com) |
|
|
He Still Talkin'? |
Bill Sanders, S&C partner, continues his proselytizing for hypertext: Society for Technical Communication's InterMountain Conference (Salt Lake City) in June, and STC's Region 7 Conference (Denver) in October. Keep all StairMasters, orange crates -- anything that resembles a soap box -- away from him. |
