I think there could be some simple but effective improvements to the way the
online reference is organized (alternate sets of organization and redundant
ways to access items from related items in different sections). I like the
way the "see also" index in the dictionary also refers to some explanation
pages; there could be more of that, and vice versa--keywords could be listed
in encyclopedia sections too.
Also perhaps some helpful additions to the information in the dictionary and
encyclopedia listings where appropriate, such as more information on
limitations or strong points of various features--the kind of thing you'd
expect in a big printed guide, but the known facts could just as well be
stated briefly in an online reference.
A PDF file would be nice, or the ability perhaps to browse the online
documentation (and print it) as a book, in page order rather than as pure
hypermedia. Different people really do access information in significantly
different ways--for myself, I hardly ever touched any of the hefty printed
books that come with products, and usually use something like the dictionary
rather than the encyclopedia or PDF--but of course, many people like just
the opposite, to read an encyclopedia reference from cover to cover before
beginning.
For me, I like to dive right in and use context sensitive help with
different indices to the information. So, for people like me, I would
suggest making the help context sensitive by word or object selected,
linking all the help together more, providing different ways to access the
keywords and objects (by category or task) and adding a little bit of
additional information into the dictionary and encyclopedia if other useful
details about the object or keyword are known--the things people find out
about a feature after working with it extensively. (And making it so that a
character is not inserted in the script when the help key is pressed.)
So, you can strive for the best mix, and as others have mentioned, the right
kind of documentation (and promotion) might bring in new groups of users.
Improvements to the documentation would help existing users. But you may not
be able to produce the perfect set of references to please everyone all the
time within the limits of time and expense.
I would prefer to see more features added than documentation. Any third
parties could write extra documentation in a variety of formats and focusing
on different ways of using the products to fit the needs of different
people. But although third parties can also add features, it makes more
sense for the Revolution team to focus primarily on this part of the work
and leave some specialized tasks like alternative types of documentation to
others. Third party documentation could be retail or shareware, traditional
book or hypermedia--just one reference might not do the job for everyone, so
it wouldn't hurt if more than one person gave it a shot.
I would also agree that printed books shouldn't be included if it costs too
much for the company. They could always be available for an extra fee, or
downloaded in PDF, free for both the user (whether registered or using the
starter kit) and free for the Revolution company as well. As a new user, I
think the features of MetaCard is exciting, and Revolution is exciting as a
way to access those features and put them to work easily. I think those
features are what the Revolution team should focus on primarily. Not that
Revolution shouldn't have their own top-notch set of documentation, but if
that still doesn't serve everyone's needs, it doesn't have too; there can
always be contributions from other parties.
Curry Kenworthy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
