Back in 1998, I defined topics as "'chunks' of information in a Help file that answer one question or provide focused, specific content." Ten years later, I typically use the same definition. However, there have been some changes in how those "chunks" are developed.

In the beginning, we mostly used Microsoft Word to create topics, where codes or styles in the doc file divided the output into topics. One topic in the Word file became one topic in the output. With the advent of HTML Help, we moved to HTML files, and what we saw in development was what we saw in the output. The best we could for reuse was using a topic in more than one place in the table of contents.

This was because most of us used file-based tools. But now we have more features. For example, snippets are included (or embedded) in the core topic. Variables let us define reusable bits of content (and sometimes we can override them when publishing). Build tags, conditional tags, and variants let us choose which topics are published. And when we publish, the file that we created in development becomes the file that is used for the output. (One exception would be those using Word for WinHelp, HTML, or HTML Help...but again, the topic that is defined in Word becomes the output topic.)

With XML, however, things are a little different. Topics in development may only be part of the topic that is published. For example, a topic may reference another topic. In development, you see the reference, and in the output, you see the topic.

And with XML and database tools, there's another level of differences. Topics are organized with maps or tables of contents. Different settings control if the individual topics in development will become individual topics in the output or if multiple topics in development will be merged to create only one topic in the output.

What I think we will be faced with is a terminology change. Sometimes I call topics in development "topic objects", as they may or may not be the final topic. These topic objects are still chunks of content, but now their content is determined by their reusability. (For great articles about reusability, see Michael Hughes' blog. He mostly focuses on DITA...after all, he works for IBM...the concepts can be used with any authoring tool.)

Do you use different terminology to explain the difference between topics in development and topics in the output? Do you think new terminology will help? Or will it just make this more confusing?