RH Smart Index Wizard

[HKabaker]

I need some help from anyone who has used the Smart Index Wizard, with a reasonable measure of success, to pick up topics that are not in the index but contain keywords already entered.

The dialog calls this "Add existing index keywords to topic(s)" as opposed to "Find new and existing index keywords."

(Adding keywords to topics is what I used to do in html help when I had the option of building an index file or inserting keyword data into the topic itself. But in WebHelp it means adding a topic to the index when it has keywords in the master list.)

Single keywords are not a problem. But the wizard doesn't recognize multilevel keyword-subkeyword entries when they occur in a topic, or it flattens them into multiple keywords at the top level.

Obviously, I can edit the index list afterward, and attach a topic to a multilevel entry, but I have to know where it is. I'd like the wizard to find it. Has anyone done this, or found an automated way to work around it?

I've searched in the forums and Adobe's RH knowledgebase, as well as Rick's and Peter's sites. The RH help topic talks about mulitilevel keywords, but doesn't address this issue.

Thanks.

Harvey

[RoboColum_n_]

Hi Harvey.

I've never found a truly acceptable method of using the Smart Index Wizard. I've tried various settings but gave up. It's just too clunky and inaccurate.

I came to the conclusion some time ago that indexing is an art form and that a form of automation is the holy grail of HATs. Personally I don't think there is any substitute to rolling ones sleeves up and getting your hands dirty. It takes time but then heck I'm not normal - I actually enjoy indexing

[Captiv8r]

Hi Harvey

I agree with Colum and never did use the Smart Index Wizard in my professional use. I only show it to others. However, you may wish to look at the following and see if it helps accomplish what you are after.

Launch the Smart Index Wizard.
Click the Phrases... button on the first screen of the wizard.
Add any multiple words there.

Cheers... Rick

[Linux Rules]

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Colum McAndrew
It takes time but then heck I'm not normal - I actually enjoy indexing

---

Hello Colum -

You are one sick puppy...

...but who am I to label anyone - I left for work at 4:30 this morning , drove 94 miles through a snow storm (with black ice under the snow), passed numerous accidents , just so I could review our customer's user acceptance test plan.

I think I'm the sick puppy...

Regards,
GEWB

[RoboColum_n_]

Yes I had a car like that once GEWB

[HKabaker]

Colleagues,

I'd never ask RH to produce something I don't have to edit.

But consider this:

When you ask the wizard to find every instance of first-level keywords already entered into the index, it does so reliably. You can accept all, or edit the checkboxes.

This alone is the basis for assembling and applying a master one-level index to a group of closely related projects. In my case it's a release notes compendium, a master project with about a dozen sub-projects. Each sub is what we produced at the time of the release. They have a lot in common over time. In retrospect, indexing each would have benefited from using a master list that couldn't exist until now.

Now I have that list, in an hhk file of keywords only (no topic links). It took some doing, but not so much as you may think. I've been refining it.

I could re-index all the subs consistently and re-publish them into the master WebHelp package. A significant side benefit: Breadcrumbs and search highlights for all. (You get these in a master project only for subs generated in RH 7. To be "consistent" I would have to forgo these features. Not that I'm a slave to consistency, but it would be nice to upgrade all.)

Also consider this:

When you ask the wizard to find new terms, it comes up with two-level keyword suggestions and, once in a while, it's right.

Why, then, couldn't it track multilevel terms in a topic, especially when I'm providing the list and not asking RH to make the associations? This isn't Google science.

Thanks.

Harvey