next version


I’ve received several emails asking me what’s coming in the next version of our portal technologies. I can assure you that we have a solid plan in place to deliver great technology based on customer and partner feedback. Unfortunately, I can’t share that with you at this moment. However, I would like to solicit feedback from the community. Obviously, Microsoft can’t commit to or respond to anything that is suggested. This is more of an open forum/exchange if you will. I’ve recently unmoderated my blog – this means that all the comments/feedback will post automatically. Go crazy!

Comments (36)

  1. TrondB says:

    I would love to see better document management capabilities, better support for UI design/customization, better search frontends, search across team sites and workflow enhancements.

  2. Addy Santo says:

    An XML webservice model which is actually usable by clients! Hand coding CAML is so 1990’s…

  3. Addy Santo says:

    Oh, and per-item permissions 🙂

  4. Geoff Coupe says:

    1) Faster navigation in document libraries that use folders by having proper breadcrumb support in the path displayed in the title area.

    2) Graying-out (or removal) of actions that non-administrators cannot complete.

    3) Restitution of the document management capabilities of V1 that were removed in V2.

  5. Per Manniche Bering says:

    Glad you asked !

    Windows Sharepoint Services :

    – User aware UI (i only see what i have access to) [Most important]

    – Search down (when searching in root site, the scope of search should include all sub sites)

    – More steamlined UI/Theme customizing (chould be nice if XSL where used)

    – ASP.NET v2.0 WebPart compatibility

    – Forms Authentication (low priority)

    – More webpart out of the box

    BTW : Can you confirm that MSCMS is a discontinued product ? If not, what are future for that product ?

    Regards

  6. Andrey Skvortsov says:

    Less dependence on custom libraries and more on latest framework development(ASP.NET2).Standardize using of provider approach around all base components.More powerful client side API(MSXML or something like that,more feature rich webservice.htc or .NET based SOAP1.2 client library preferred).

  7. trackme says:

    Better integration with Project 2003. It is all so confusing whether to install Sharepoint Team Services first on the server or Project 2003.

  8. Cyriel says:
    • Decent promotion of all properties in a Document Library. I really would like to not only see my custom metadata but also standard stuff like Author, Subject etc.

      – Ability to create Event Handlers for EVERY list

      – Better ACL for lists (Document and Form libraries in particular), both on folder and item level.

      – Role/Rights aware UI, so standards users don’t see the site settings and stuff

      – Better support for indexing custom file formats. Writing IFilters and the like sucks a bit. (Let us write filters using a easy to use managed model – would really rock)

      – Use ASP.Net authentication schemes instead of IIS authentication schemes. Also allow multiple schemes to be used in the same site.

      – Versioning/Backup/Restore support for pages inside the portal (would be really helpful in situations when you are customizing things and something gets completely screwed up).

      – …
  9. Cyriel says:
    • also supply some event like OnInit() on lists so you are able to fill the list with content from a external source when needed.

      – in this case, also provide a option to make a list read-only.

      This is because Dataview listparts are a bit more HTMLísh (and look a bit ugly compared with the nice lists Sharepoint can render) and are not customizable by endusers (e.g. grouped/sorted/filtered) because they consist out of XML/XSLT generated HTML code.

  10. Mike Lockyer says:

    Better accessibility support

    Forms Authentication

    ASP.NET compatibility

    User configurable styles

    • Webparts for managing Users/Passwords in WSS Local mode (typical wss extranet in DMZ, no AD here)
  11. Angus Logan says:

    More clearly defined licensing options.

  12. Ditto everyone else’s replies… plus:

    – Move away from FP2003 and to VS.NET 2005 (since the next version won’t be out until 2006+).

    – Move away from ghosted/unghosted model. Instead of the current site def./template model, why use the MCMS model where you are provided a ton of controls (navigation, header, search, etc) and you can build your own sites, leveraging the SharePoint framework (like MCMS sites leverage the assets displayed in Site Manager). OR, you can use the prebuilt templates in the current format.

    – If you don’t have access to something, disable the link or give people the option to hide it all together.

  13. Shane says:

    There are many great things about the functionality of lists, but I’d really like to see the ability to customize them fully without having to use data views.

    CSS instead of table based design would have a very positive impact as well.

  14. Greg Martin says:

    Focus on supportability. Site, area and item level restore and/or item tombstoning (think Exch 2k3)

    Doc-level security

    \Greg

  15. Stephen says:

    Much much better UI in Sharepoint administrative functions.

  16. Jan Tielens says:

    From the top of my head…

    – decent event model for document libraries in which you can handle each event

    – decent event model for lists

    – security settings per field in a list or document library (e.g. only administrators can change field X)

    – item level security settings (would be nice to have)

    – one-to-many relationship between lists and/or document libraries (now we have already a lookup field type, it would be great if this could be extended so you can choose more than one item in the lookup field)

    – multilingual sites

    – ability to extend the drop down menus without having to play with the client side java script

  17. Craig Box says:

    Agree with everyone else’s comments (Event Handlers for every list including would be at the top of the list).

    These wold be nice to haves:

    – Ability to aggregate lists from multiple WSS sub sites

    – More advanced list linking (eg. List A has first name, last name, email then List B allows for linking to first name but also will display last name and email in list B view)

    – Ability to link lists across WSS sites

    – Dynamic Sites Directory (ability to synchronise sites

    – Nicer navigation (Dropdowns etc.)

    – SPS Area Map/Tree

    – Profile Database import from SQL (not only AD – or the combination of S:LQ)

    – Same security model on SPS lists as WSS lists

    – A "Super" list that allows selecting what functionality is available (eg. export to calendar/contact, email to person, keep history etc.)

    – Issues list content saving in template

    Don’t get me wrong the SPS & WSS framework is great but if some more features came out of the box, configuration of the application would be easier & faster… but then again.. that would sell me out of a job 😉

  18. wjvii says:

    More powerful search options

  19. David says:

    Better integration between SPS and WSS, in terms of navigation and security. Three levels of navigation is a bit confusing, i.e. SPS, WSS, Document Library. It would be nice if the templates included tree view navigation and if the security groups from the portal could be carried through to the subsite collections (rather than having to create two different sets).

  20. Lawrence Liu says:

    Provide better support for extranet scenario (with pluggable authentication with SiteMinder or AD/AM and other LDAP directories)!!!

  21. Cyriel says:
    • Possibility to aggegrate the different types of sharepoint items/lists of the same type in one new list. e.g. document libraries, sites, tasks etc. etc. – also make it possible to apply custom filters/groups/sorting on this new list.
  22. Thierry Masson says:

    Mainly for WSS sites :

    Doc. libs

    ————–

    – Item level security for Document libraries (at least on directories)

    – Columns Lookup across WSS sites

    – Columns lookup to external database tables

    – Hierarchical list of values for columns with a treeview user interface

    – Read only columns

    – Basic workflow including serial and parallel approval

    – Explorer view matching a list view (very useful for bulk download)

    – Alerts based on a value for a column (i.e. alert me if Topic=SharePoint) vs all the content today

    – Set maximum document versions per library

    – Purge versions (keep the last N versions)

    – Let the user decide when a new version must be created

    – Views : Group by compatible with multi-selection columns

    – Views : allow filtering on directories

    – Upload form : Read Office custom properties of the selected file and fill-in columns as appropriate before validation

    – Tree view for browsing the folders structure

    – DataSheet view : Ask validation before applying bulk changes

    – Improve Email notification writing all (or some) properties of the file.

    – Audit trail (file history : who did change, when, …)

    – Improve rights granularity like for lists (Allow delete or change only my own files)

    – Undelete

    – Compatibility with *.MSG file (properties promotion like From, To, CC, Date, …)

    – Copy/paste from one library to another keeping versions

    – Export/import a doc. lib including content (even if > 10 Mbytes) from one site to another

    Lists

    ———

    – Allow discussion around a document where the discussion is saved within a standard discussion board (does anybody really use the ‘Discuss feature’ based on the Office Extensions)

    – Allow copy/paste rich text

    – Navigation within a threaded discussion (show next|previosu reply, parent discussion)

    – Search attachments in lists

    – Real synchronization of contacts and events lists with MS/Exchange

    – Discussion thread sorted by date (maybe available in SP1)

    – Edit in DataSheet for images

    Other

    ———

    – **** Fully user contextual user interface (see only what you are allowed to see or to do)

    – Propose a navigation webpart to surf the Webpart pages

    – Item level backup and recovery

    – Off-line synchronization

    – Better user interface for managing site groups and cross-site groups (add a group to doc. Lib or a list; you need to know the name of the group)

  23. Bill Richardson says:

    The ability to create lookup values in lists that will draw values from lists in other sites. This allows for common values across multiple sites.

  24. Leon O'Brien says:
    • Both CMS and SPS should become a single platform, with a single development interface (VS.NET), to create a truely rich portal technology platform. Currently, when

      implementing both platforms for a single portal solution the overlap in capability causes come element of confusion.

      – There should be built in support for a wider variety of navigation models; navigation developed based on information

      relationships for example, whether the content lives in a SPS site, or a CMS channel.

      – This leads into the products delivering greater information management capabilities and better metadata support for all entities, with metadata captured throughout their entire lifecycle.

      – More dynamic Best-Bets capability, the current manual model is pretty ordinary, surely some best bets can be automatically generated based on user propensity modelling.

      – Better support for geographically distributed portals that require the same content, currently lacking in SPS (apart from Shared Services capability that is)

      – More aggregated list types, having a single list that displays the content of multiple lists throughout the portal

      – A better promotion model, rather than promoting to areas, surely you can promote to a list type, and then be prompted for the additional properties required for that list.

      Thats all for today.

  25. Cyriel says:
    • ability to sync any content in any list with any 3rd party application (a more extensive version of the current ‘link to …’ feature)
  26. Cyriel says:
    • more flexibility in creating custom toolbars/menuitems for any (for example: make it possible to change the position of the menuitem within the popup menu), Also provide a easy way to modify/delete existing menuitems/toolbar buttons when needed.
  27. I may be echoing some suggested by others:

    – VS.NET 2005 integration (as opposed to FrontPage-only)

    – Easier WebPart development with design support (support new ASP.NET 2.0 web parts)

    – More granular security (item-level)

    – Export/Import of libraries/items

    – Seamless integration with CMS

    – Consolidated config/admin tools and robust GUI for stsadm

    – Better documentation/roadmap for CAS (Code Access Security) permissions and recommendations

    – easy custom workflow

  28. Cetus says:

    Multilangual GUI based on user settings or group membership. Licence model applicable to large sites

  29. linda says:

    If only one thing gets changed, I’m really hoping that it’s hiding options when the user does not have permission to change them. I’ve had to explain this over and over and over again to bemused SharePoint newbies. Or they could be greyed out, or SharePoint could tell the user first that they don’t have permission. Whatever, as long as they don’t get all the way through the process and get confronted with a login dialogue.

    Also on my list is item level permissions (and alerts), then field level permissions.

  30. Client requests (multiple): ability to provide discusssion threads that do not close after returning from reading the item. People report they get lost as when in the middle of a disucssion and they click a specific item to read then return, the list is collapsed.

  31. jan tore says:

    -Column lookup against custom datasources (WSS-lists/Web service/SQL table) globally accessible across sites

    -Better integration between CMS and SPS in alerts, publishing, indexing.

  32. Weddings says:

    I’ve received several emails asking me what’s coming in the next version of our portal technologies. I can assure you that we have a solid plan in place to deliver great technology based on customer and partner feedback. Unfortunately, I can’t share tha