See Calling Webhelp for the options for calling WebHelp. Although it doesn't explicitly say so, WebHelp Pro has the same options. I can't speak for HTML5. As for calling a search term, you may well be right that you call one programatically but I would not know about that.
Ok so basically, "Map IDs" and "Topic IDs" are different... but they're setup the same. Very confusing to me.
Please note that for HTML5, the method is described in the following page:
Basically, it's http://yoursite/path-to-html5output/index.htm?rhcsh=1&rhnewwnd=0&rhmapno=????? , where ???? is your topicid/helpid/chsid/mapid or whatever you call it.
A couple of items I would add to Willam and Colum's comments.
At the present time, WebHelp Pro (the Rh Server 9) does not support HTML5 output. WebHelp on a conventional web server is fine.
In terms of the odd terminology for CSH, the term MAP Number or Map ID, generally refers to a unique number that is assigned to a topic so that it can be referred to in the application calling the help. The Topic ID is generally an alphanumeric string which is often the name of the topic title connected by underscores. Depending on the language of the application, sometimes only the Map number or sometimes only the Topic ID is used. Or, as you have learned, sometimes neither one is used and a URL is used instead!
You and your developers may also find these topics helpful in the RoboHelp online help which can be downloaded here:
Look at Chapter 11 for some interesting specifics on the many ways to call CSH. Of course the links mentioned in Willam's and Colum's posts are excellent as well.
Adobe Certified RoboHelp and Captivate Instructor
Thanks for the precision on the differences between MapID and TopicID.
As for the "interesting specifics", if you're talking about the documentation giving multiple APIs and ways to call the documentation using functions... honestly that's not going to happen with us. Specific code implementations like this pretty much means that if we were to decide to switch to another documentation authoring suite, there would be a necessary code change in our software, and that sort of lock-in is not very desirable. Whereas now with pure URL calls, if I decide I'm going with someone else, I can just change my urlRewrites to the new format and be done with it. We don't have plans to change, but keeping the door open is fine with us.