Build Tags

[flucco]

I thought the build tags were a great idea, used them in both the TOC and topic level, and even some inside the content. After I first did this, along with experimenting with the Define (what to include vs what exclude), it was great. Now, I am recompiling those same files, and missing topics that are tagged to be included.

Those were mostly topics with dual tags, so I removed one (defeating the purpose of tags). That worked for some, but not all. I moved on to another layout, and now again topics that are tagged to go in are not showing up! And these do not have dual tags. I don't know what else to do, and folks are waiting on this project.

Is there a way to review you TOC before compiling (like with the print version)? Which works better - tagging the Topic or the TOC or both? Any other ideas? :)

Felicia

[flucco]

me again. I figured it out - well some of it. I'd still appreciate some feedback on my questions in the last paragraph.

And just in case anyone is experiencing the same problem, what I found is this... I had topics marked as "Trader" and defined the single source as "Trader and CM." I had to go back and add all that applied to the Trader tags. NOW the topics I want appeared. HOWEVER, some content is marked CM or NCM, and in the end NEITHER appeared. I'm going to experiment with the TOC level and hope that helps. I have a deadline guys; any help is appreciated. 🙂

[flucco]

Scratch that last message! It messed up the content tags. I found the problem to be in the compiling. Instead of a simple "Trader and CM" I had to compile by excluding NCMs (and everything else). Now I got what I need.

[RoboColum_n_]

Having seen this thread I thought it might be worth asking whether you realise that the point of build tags is to EXCLUDE content. I just ask because it sounds like you may be attempting to exclude AND include content.

[flucco]

I found that excluding content gave me better results. HOWEVER, I have several topics where there are dual tags. These don't seem to work. If a topic is marked for trader and supervisor, and I do a trader doc excluding supervisors, that topic is not included. I have content marked also within some topics, so this could be a problem.

I really need to understand the difference between marking the topics in the topic list versus marking the topics in the TOC.

Can anyone explain?

[Captiv8r]

Hi flucco

Think of the TOC as you would a regular Web Page. It is simply a launching point with many links that point to other pages. By applying a tag to a TOC item, you are asking RoboHelp to remove the link. The page it links to is still there. You are simply removing the link to the page.

The Topics list is a list of HTML pages. If you apply a tag to a topic in the Topics List, you are asking RoboHelp to remove that topic from the mix when you generate or compile using a build expression.

So here's the kicker. If you apply the tag to the topic, there should be no need to apply the same tag to the TOC element linking to that topic. If it's missing in the output as a result of a condition, the TOC will self adjust to remove the reference to that topic.

I know it's tempting to apply tagging to the TOC. Personally, I avoid it.

Cheers... Rick

[flucco]

What would make these Build Tags more efficient is the ability to build an expression in the content vs just checking them off. Then I could assign a paragraph to "trader OR supervisor."

[Captiv8r]

Hi Felicia

Care to expound on that?

I believe what you are describing is actually possible to accomplish. BUT, you have to think of things differently.

Note that anything NOT tagged will always appear in the output. Build Tags may be used in two different ways. You may use them to *INCLUDE* information or *EXCLUDE* information. Most of the time we recommend using them to *EXCLUDE* information. The build expression is normally NOT TagName.

So let's say you have a topic that says: The red rabbit ran round the rumwater. You might have different tags applied to rum. (Perhaps Alcohol and Booze) You might also have a different tag applied to water. (Perhaps innocent)

So your build expression might be simply Alcohol or it might be simply Booze. In this case the sentence would read The red rabbit ran round the rum. If you changed the build expression to simply "Innocent", the sentence would change.

I believe it's simpler to think in terms of what you want excluded as opposed to the other way around. But it can work two different ways.

Cheers... Rick

[flucco]

Thanks, Rick.

I'll take your advice and stick to marking the topics only. The confusion started with the build dialog where you can check either or both the topics and TOC columns.

I'm going to experiment further with INCLUDING vs. EXCLUDING in order to get the content right. If you have any tips/tricks for that...

Thanks in advance. 🙂

[Captiv8r]

Hello again

Here is what I would advise. Create a small project that has perhaps ten topics in it. Then experiment away. Apply tags to topics and use inclusive as well as exclusive expressions until you get a good feel for how things work with either approach.

Then take the same content and flesh it out a bit. Maybe add some tables and images. Experiment with tagging content pieces until you get a good feel for how things work with content level tagging.

Once you feel you have mastered it, then return to your live project and it should become much easier to determine your best approach.

Cheers... Rick

[flucco]

You're absolutely right. My experimenting proved that EXCLUDING provides better results. Except in cases of dual tags (and I have quite a few). Using your example,

I'll mark RUM as both 'alcohol' and 'booze' and WATER with 'innocent.'

Now I compile with the following expression: "Include alcohol and innocent and NOT booze." Because I said NOT booze, the word rum will not appear, though it should because I said to include 'alcohol.'

This is the problem I am running into because some of my content pertains to both a trader and a supervisor, but each are separate documents. So for trader document excluding supervisor, it leaves out the text that also pertains to the trader and should be included. See my frustration?

[Guest]

Hi flucco. You might be thinking a little too granularly (is that a word???).

There would be nothing wrong with having that sentence twice in the topic, worded slightly differently to address both audiences, and with one of the two different build tags covering an entire sentence. This may be easier than trying to break a single sentence into chunks that are to be addressed to one or both audiences.

Is that clear, or do you want an example?

[flucco]

IDEA! 🙂 what if I didn't specify NOT Supervisor, but instead, simply not include it in the build expression either way? I shall try it....

[flucco]

IDEA! 🙂 what if I didn't specify NOT Supervisor, but instead, simply not include it in the build expression either way? I shall try it....

[Guest]

Here's an example.

Sentence One: Rick likes a little water in his alcohol, unless it has been a tough day.

Sentence Two: Rick likes a little water in his booze, unless it has been a tough day.

Both sentences are visible to you, in the topic, but apply the trader tag to one version, and the supervisor tag to the other version - the entire sentences. You'll see the hash marks across your sentences, so it will be a cinch to review and edit as needed.

Make sense?

[flucco]

ok, that did not work. lol Supervisor content appeared because I didn't tell it not to. *sigh* Rick, re your last suggestion... may I give you an example? (I'm not dividing sentences here as much as paragraphs, but perhaps I'm not tagging them correctly.) In the following bulleted list, I'll put my tags in parens.

Example...

Right-click an order to do any of the following: (no tag, pertains to all)

Enter Order (trader)
View the Order History (trader, supervisor)
See the Position Overview (trader, supervisor)
View the Position Details and History (trader, supervisor)
Activate/Inactive Orders (trader)
Cancel Order (trader)
Show Underlying (trader, supervisor)

Double-click an order to quickly bring up the Enter Order dialog. (trader)

Double-click an order to quickly bring up the Order History window. (supervisor)

*end*

So you see all 7 bullets apply to the trader, but only 4 of them pertain to the supervisor. Now I generate a file for TRADERS and RoboHelp gives me no choice but to exclude Supervisors. The 4 bullets pertaining to the supervisor are excluded regardless of the fact that they ALSO pertain to the trader. Is that more clear? Would you do this differently?

I really appreciate your time. :)

[flucco]

ok, that did not work. lol Supervisor content appeared because I didn't tell it not to. *sigh* Rick, re your last suggestion... may I give you an example? (I'm not dividing sentences here as much as paragraphs, but perhaps I'm not tagging them correctly.) In the following bulleted list, I'll put my tags in parens.

Example...

Right-click an order to do any of the following: (no tag, pertains to all)

Enter Order (trader)
View the Order History (trader, supervisor)
See the Position Overview (trader, supervisor)
View the Position Details and History (trader, supervisor)
Activate/Inactive Orders (trader)
Cancel Order (trader)
Show Underlying (trader, supervisor)

Double-click an order to quickly bring up the Enter Order dialog. (trader)

Double-click an order to quickly bring up the Order History window. (supervisor)

*end*

So you see all 7 bullets apply to the trader, but only 4 of them pertain to the supervisor. Now I generate a file for TRADERS and RoboHelp gives me no choice but to exclude Supervisors. The 4 bullets pertaining to the supervisor are excluded regardless of the fact that they ALSO pertain to the trader. Is that more clear? Would you do this differently?

I really appreciate your time. :)

[flucco]

Imarden, thank for your examples. That is very clear. It's when one sentence is assigned mulitple tags and the build expression omits one of those. Please see the example I just posted. (I'm still trying to come up with a solution for this.)

[Guest]

But, my point is that you don't have to shove all your build tags into a single sentence.

Copy and paste the sentence, whatever it is, so that there are two.

Edit the first one for one audience, and apply your build tag to the entire sentence.

Edit the Second one for the other audience, and apply your second build tag to the entire sentence.

[Captiv8r]

Hi again

Indeed I would approach it differently. You have two outputs. One for Trader. One for Supervisor. The Supervisor sees all information for Trader anyway, no? So no need for Trader. Only a need for building the simpler layout so that the Supervisor information is peeled away.

Cheers... Rick

[flucco]

Thanks to both of you. LMarden, I see your point, and that may work. And yours, too, Rick, only it's not just two outputs. I have seven different audiences/outputs for this project. 🙂 I had to mark the content for Traders because for some audiences that would be omitted. But seriously, I appreciate both of you helping me out. One day, I'll be an expert at this too. lol

[RoboColum_n_]

Hi flucco. I answered your private message.