[EXT]: Re: [dita-users] Topichead usage and best practice #bookmap
Using <topicref format=”dita” scope=”local” type=”concept”> with <navtitle>Organizational Title Text</navtitle> validates in processing, but produces no actual output topic in HTML, though the text in the navtitle appears in the TOC in the hierarchy.
In HTML output, the problem is:
To get around those problems, you have to create an topic with a title (and preferably a useful short description). From a minimalist perspective, this is not ideal.
In cloud publishing systems, where topic count equals investment, every topic should be meaningful and useful, and large numbers of title only topics create possible duplication and a hit on total topic count. Search results return many instances of what appears to be the same topic, so you have to apply metadata to the source to ensure the correct title only topic returns it’s associated publication.
These might be some reasons why <topichead> or <topicref> without an href value shouldn’t be used for HTML publications.
Mona Ross | Sr. Information Architect | Ellucian® | M:+1.304.596.3712 | www.ellucian.com
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email from your system. Thank you.
From: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org> On Behalf Of Joe Pairman via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 2:26 AM
Subject: [EXT]: Re: [dita-users] Topichead usage and best practice #bookmap
Thanks for sharing that! Tony provides a really good, succinct view there on why not to use topicheads as a general rule.
The only time I used them in an IA was to drive a very specific output where the topic heads were non-selectable visual cues. Even so, I might be tempted to do it a different way if I had to do it again — something like a specialized outputclass attribute triggering custom stylesheet processing.
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 15:28 <ronny.flink@...> wrote:
Good point. I knew there was some catch, but couldn't quite figure out what. I'll pass the info along.