Restricting search results

[helseykc]

I am generating a few different outputs from a project which contains all the information about a particular product. It contains both internal and customer information. When I generate output for the customer I do not want internal information being released so I exclude that from the relevant TOC. However the excluded information appears in search results.

I guess I could use conditions to hide internal information from the customer documents, but what if I DO want to use that internal topic in a different customer output? I don't want to have to duplicate those topics - one topic for internal use in one output, and the same topic for use in a different output which might be customer facing!

[NorthEast]

I'm not totally sure what you're asking; why would you need to duplicate topics?

You would need to mark the internal content with conditions; i.e. use conditions on the actual topic/text, not just the TOC entry.

Then you just create targets with the necessary conditions excluded (or not); and supply the appropriate output to the customer.

[helseykc]

I think you have understood what I'm asking. I wonder if I'm not using Flare correctly. Basically I have a product. I have all the information about that product in a Flare project. I generate different outputs from that project - some contain information only for internal use, some contain information for customers too. There is some content which must never be seen by customer, there is some information which appears in one customer document but not in another. Using this simple example:

I have a project called Pets. In it I have information about Cats, Dogs, and Fish. I have the following outputs:

Pets: contains all content
Fish: Fish only
Cats: Cats only
Dogs: Dogs only
Furry pets: Cats and Dogs

So I can use conditions - fish content is only seen in Pets and Fish outputs. Cat content should appear in Pets, Cats, and Cats and Dogs. Dog content should appear in Pets, Cats and Dogs... Now, because both Cat and Dog content needs to be visible in Cats and Dogs how do I hide their search results from the relevant individual Cats and Dogs outputs? It seems a bit odd that the search isn't restricted to the contents of the TOC - surely that is all the information that is displayed in the output and therefore SHOULD be the only information that can be searched?

I'm not sure if that is any clearer at all... I just want content that isn't in the output to NOT be in the search results.

[Paul Griffiths]

Tag your topics as either Fish, Cat or Dog.

For the Pets target, exclude nothing.
For the Fish target, exclude Cat and Dog.
For the Cats target, exclude Fish and Dog.
For the Dogs target, exclude Cat and Fish.
For the Furry Pets target, exclude Fish.

It seems a bit odd that the search isn't restricted to the contents of the TOC - surely that is all the information that is displayed in the output and therefore SHOULD be the only information that can be searched?

I think this must be the most frequently-asked question in this forum. The answer is no, sometimes (oftentimes?) your help will contain more topics than are directly-accessible via the ToC. I sometimes think MadCap should add an Include only ToC topics (and linked topics) check box to non-print targets, just to avoid this confusion.

[helseykc]

Thanks Paul - nice surname. (I'm a Griffith - sorry, a bit off topic!)

Didn't realise it was such a commonly asked question - I searched for "search" which, of course, came up with too many results and typically I wasn't able to restrict the search adequately to find any related posts! Your suggestion is great - I wonder if it's been submitted to MadCap as an enhancement. Seems like a good idea and I'll do it now - I guess the more people request it the more likely it is to happen!

Thanks again.

[LTinker68]

Just to add something to what Dave wrote... Applying an exclude condition on a TOC entry only affects that TOC entry -- the topic will still appear in the output. Applying an exclude condition to a topic file will exclude both that topic and its entry in the TOC, so one bird, two stones.

[whunter]

I sometimes think MadCap should add an Include only ToC topics (and linked topics) check box to non-print targets, just to avoid this confusion.

I submitted an enhancement request for this a little while ago; I encourage anyone else who might use this to do the same.

There are some projects where I like the way it works currently, but for others it is just extra work. Would be very useful to have the option to do it one way or the other.

[Madcap Guru]

Here's a KB article that I wrote a few years ago that goes over this..

http://kb.madcapsoftware.com/Content/Fl ... _Level.htm

[nickatwork]

Here's a KB article that I wrote a few years ago that goes over this..

http://kb.madcapsoftware.com/Content/Fl ... _Level.htm

Is there much reason for this? I would have thought if someone doesnt want something in their TOC, then most likely they dont want it included in their output either, why continue to include it in search etc.

Im just trying to understand the reasoning for conditionals in a TOC working this way. Surely its more beneficial to have output control at a global level (setting them in content explorer to affect all output) and setting them at each output level (TOC), or only at TOC level.

[whunter]

When creating online help, sometimes people have stuff that they want to include in their content that is not in the TOC. Stuff that is only referenced via context-sensitive help in the application, for example. So in that case the current behavior of including everything is useful.

I usually include everything in my TOC, and in that case having to condition out other topics (such as ones I use for print output) is a pain. But I have been on the other side of it before, and have had valid reasons for not wanting to include things in the TOC, so I wouldn't want to take away the option to do it either way.

[i-tietz]

Actually ... I used to think that for print output you need a different structure than for hypertext output ... simply because the way you consume information is different in sequential and hypertext style.

E.g.: In HTML Help we have a structure that bases on our different types of topics and on different types of approaches:
1.
description of controls (tabs, fields, lists, windows ... ). This is typically a sort of info sb needs, when he's right on that UI and wants to know something about the consequences of ticking a checkbox or whether that's the checkbox he has to tick to get situation "S". CSH for exactly that reason.
2.
Step-by-step descriptions. You wanna execute task "A"? 1. go there to do this 2. go to that other place ...
3.
Concepts of the application. Explains processes inside the application. For people who want to understand the concept rather than following a step-by-step checklist.
4.
FAQ. You have a problem or a question and don't know where to look for the solution? Things like "A line in the list is in italics - why's that?"


In a "print" output I would want to get all the topics together that belong to the same subject, like: invoicing. This includes concept topics, UI description topics, step-by-step checklists and FAQ for ABC Analysis only ...


First and second sort key have to be exactly the other way around - I just don't understand how somebody can use the same structure for sequential and hypertext media.

[whunter]

I don't use the same structure for print and online media -- I use the same topics and organize them differently. There's a different TOC for online and print. And sometimes different topics for each to accommodate the difference in organization (and for title pages and whatnot for print).

[Madcap Guru]

I've seen where customers would have links to a different topic that wouldn't be needed in a TOC, such as a list or directions type page, but could still be found by a search, and with flare you can tag topics to not be included in search, for webhelp, would still be found in html help thou

[Pannonian]

Another example is our company: We got several customer-specific outputs. So there 95% of the articles are the same for each customer output. But the other 5% are specific for each customer. I wont open a projekt for every customer. So for example i got company A and B. Article A is just for company A and article B is just for company B. Both are linked in their respective TOC. But it isn't intended that i search in webhelp for company B for something and get article A. The only way i see up to this point is to exclude article A and B from search via properties (which isn't working by the way, only throwing the error message "Apply Dialgo failed: Object reference not set to an instance of an object") - but i would like to see article A if i search for it in output A and see article B if i search for it in output B.

[i-tietz]

Another example is our company: We got several customer-specific outputs. So there 95% of the articles are the same for each customer output. But the other 5% are specific for each customer. I wont open a projekt for every customer. So for example i got company A and B. Article A is just for company A and article B is just for company B. Both are linked in their respective TOC. But it isn't intended that i search in webhelp for company B for something and get article A. The only way i see up to this point is to exclude article A and B from search via properties (which isn't working by the way, only throwing the error message "Apply Dialgo failed: Object reference not set to an instance of an object") - but i would like to see article A if i search for it in output A and see article B if i search for it in output B.

???
You don't build separate outputs for customers? Why?

[Pannonian]

for sure i got several outputs, but if the articles are all in the same project, they're all added in every output

[i-tietz]

You don't use conditions to exclude the unwanted stuff?

[Pannonian]

I was thinking in the wrong direction. I was trying to accomplish this via excluding from toc and excluding from search. Too early in the morning -.-

Nevermind, only this stupid .NET error remains, but i fear i'll have to search for it the rest of the day.

Vielen Dank in den hohen Norden