4 Replies Latest reply on Feb 27, 2007 2:34 PM by HKabaker

    File comparison for RoboHelp?

      Is there a way to do a file comparison for RoboHelp projects? I've read in the online help that you can do a file comparison if you're using version control software, which we're not. Our reviewers would like a way to see what has changed between versions.

        • 1. Re: File comparison for RoboHelp?
          HKabaker Level 2
          You may want to generate a Word version of any topics that have changed, to be compared against a Word version of the same pieces from the preceding version.

          Word seems to be capable of delivering the goods for the most fetishly inclined to look for changes.

          • 2. Re: File comparison for RoboHelp?
            tware123 Level 1
            Thanks for that suggestion, Harvey. We know we can generate Word files, but we're looking for something more automated and accurate. When you generate Printed Documentation, not all of the topics are included (pop-ups, etc.).

            Our hope is that there is a way to compare the project or the .chm files. Has anyone done this????
            • 3. Re: File comparison for RoboHelp?
              Peter Grainge Adobe Community Professional
              The print layout can contain any topic you choose to put into it, popup is a method of display, not a type of topic. Create a print layout for this purpose and bang everything in.

              It should take all of five minutes and the count is accurate.

              • 4. Re: File comparison for RoboHelp?
                HKabaker Level 2
                I have always been impatient with editors and reviewers who insist on changes being flagged. In my view, this is the lazy person's way of doing a half-hearted job. They don't want to look at anything but the changes. I wouldn't handle my contributors that way; why let reviewers off the hook?

                The underlying assumption is the material was at least correct, if not perfect, before changes and doesn't warrant a second look. A foolish assumption. Additionally, this approach will fail to spot contradictions and inconsistencies between new material and earlier text that wasn't revised.

                Yet I can and will suggest a tool, one I would never use for editorial review, that pinpoints with dead-on accuracy any differences between files.

                It's useful for controlling the publishing process and for checking back on what RH has published between versions.

                An inexpensive application available on the Web is Beyond Compare. It will let you set up side-by side (or above-and-below) comparisons with options for various degrees of control, such as file revision level, date/time stamps, file size and so on. You can flag files that differ by checksum or as little as a binary value. You can open a mismatched pair and review differences line by line. You can even suppress the display of files and lines with no changes.

                That's my rant for today. Good luck.