Skip to main content
A
Anonymous
November 8, 2012
Question

Script for adding all topics to a single browse sequence

  • November 8, 2012
  • 1 reply
  • 2184 views

Hi all, has anybody perchance written a script that inserts all topics into a single browse sequence? This would be similar to the 'auto-create from TOC'-function but using a single long sequence instead of separate ones for each chapter.

Most of our users think that the concept of browse sequences is confusing in Webhelp. They just want simple 'forward' and 'backward' buttons that jump through the TOC.

Robert

This topic has been closed for replies.

1 reply

Captiv8r
Captiv8r
Legend
November 8, 2012

Hi Robert

There's no need for a script. Just use the auto-create. Then type 0 (zero) for the level.

Cheers... Rick

A
Anonymous
November 8, 2012

..even though the topics are added in a strange manner.

First the BRS jumps through the topics assigned to the top level books

(Chapter 1, Chapter 2 etc.). Then at the end it continues at the start

again and jumps through the topics in the individual chapters. Well,

I'll come up with a feature name that imlpies it was planned that way.

A
Anonymous
November 20, 2012

Can you not use this TOC solely for the purpose of creating the browse sequence?

See www.grainge.org for RoboHelp and Authoring tips

@petergrainge


That is what we hoped for:

1. In FM, you have two separate TOCs (one structured with chapters, one

flat).

2. When yu recaive an updated version of the FM book, you first change

the settings to import the flat TOC and update.

3. Expected result: a flat TOC is generated in RH which can be used to

build the browse sequence.

4. After this, change the import settings back to the structured TOC and

update again.

5. Result: the TOC in RH is built again using the chapter structure. The

browse sequence still works.

The problem is step 3, we never achieved a flat TOC in RH.

I admit that this is a quite awkward process anyway. It seems like the

only way to automize the forward/backward buttons which are a

requirement here. I would have omitted these button in the first place,

no need to put 50% of time in nice-to-have features..

Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices