Many years ago, I consulted for a large semi-conductor company during the early stages of a software project. They had a highly detailed and fairly rigid process for software projects that started with a complete requirements document based on an extremely verbose and granular template. As the project progressed and I saw the size of the document balloon from 50 pages to more than 200 pages, I had the realization that this document would never be read by ANYONE from beginning to end. The business owners who were responsible for ensuring that the requirements fit their actual business needs were completely overwhelmed by the document's size and complexity. Six months later the business users were given their shiny new software and they were disappointed that the software didn't match their expectations.
In reality, the software was a very solid effort that met all of the requirements specified in the document. However, business users had no ability to read the requirements document and imagine what the user interface might look like for the requirements provided. I remember feeling that the business owners didn't know what they really wanted and feeling resentful of that fact. In retrospect, I realize that almost nobody knows exactly what they want, until they see it. Why? Because to a user, the interface IS the software. Concepts like data models, middleware, rules engines, LDAP, and SSL have no real meaning outside of us techies.
So how do we avoid this? Is Agile Development the answer? Agile is definitely a step in the right direction. It codifies the practices that had evolved in the most successful and most productive software development teams of the 1990s. However, we need more. We need to enable our development teams to prototype the user interface quickly and easily so that users can actually see (better yet, use) the software EARLY in the process. In web 1.0 this was a fairly straightforward effort of building static HTML wireframes. The problem was that this work was largely throwaway b/c they had to be rebuilt as servlets, JSPs, ASPs, PHPs, etc.
As our web applications become more sophisticated this approach starts to break down even further. Today, rich internet applications include syndicated content, widgets, DOM manipulation, Ajax calls, and often a substantial amount of JavaScript. Static wireframes just cannot easily emulate this kind of rich user experience accurately.
What If?
What if you could build the user interface prototype in a matter of days or weeks without a single line of server-side code or even a datamodel? What if the business owner could not only play with this prototype, but also provide context specific feedback seamlessly while exploring the prototype? Finally, what if the prototype wasn't a prototype at all, but was the actual user-interface of the final product (zero throwaway code)... even if you haven't decided which server-side technology you want to use (Java, .Net, Ruby, PHP, Python, Perl)?
This is exactly how we develop software for our consulting customers today using the Appcelerator platform. We've been doing this for over a year now, but we haven't really given it a name until recently. We call it "Interactive Use-Cases". Essentially, we skip the entire functional requirements definition phase and move directly from use-cases to working prototype! This is only possible because of the advantages that the Appcelerator platform provides us. Let me explain.
Technological Enablers
First, Appcelerator's widget library, web expression language, and message-oriented architecture were designed to enable web developers to build UIs with the minimal amount of code (read: JavaScript) possible. As an example, Ajaxian's Dion Almaer posted a small interactive web page on his blog and invited people to port it to their favorite JavaScript framework. Compare the ViewSource of the Appcelerator version to those of the other frameworks. More app + less code = better productivity.
Second, the fact that you are not generating your HTML from server-side scripts frees you from the wasted effort associated with building throwaway static wireframes. Build applications as Ajax enabled .html files which dynamically pull data/content from the server and (re)render those sections of the page accordingly.
Third, our message-oriented architecture is ideal when prototyping because message subscribers in the browser do not care about the source of their messages (that's the point of publish/subscribe architectures). So build the entire user interface with the exact messaging code that they will need for production use. But instead of building a datamodel, DAO objects, DTOs, business logic, and such to provide the actual service implementations, just add a single line to your webapp to include a single JavaScript file containing mock implementations of these backend services. In 90% of the cases you can mock that service with a couple lines of JavaScript that generates a JSON message with a mock payload.
My favorite part about this approach is that once you have gotten sign-off from the business owners, you can remove a single line from the application and all of the mock services have now been turned off. And the server-side programmers have a complete contract of every service which needs to be developed along with test data. Even better, they can choose to implement those services in any language they prefer because the UI is just producing/consuming JSON.
Fourth, thanks to a recent enhancement by Andrew Zuercher, we can easily collect user feedback on our user interface prototype by passing an additional URL parameter which highlights the border of any HTML control on mouseOver. By CTRL-clicking on any highlighted element a feedback dialog box appears that includes the specific page and HTML control being commented on. Users can see other users comments so that feedback effort isn't duplicated. UI elements that already have comments are indicated with red borders.
Everyone knows that prototyping is a valuable exercise that improves the likelihood that the business users will be satisfied with the end-product. However, the limitations of web technology have made it prohibitively expensive and time consuming for all but the most critical web projects...... until now.
No comments:
Post a Comment