Keyword Replacement Vs. Content editing


(Tony Kidman) #1

Hi all,

 

I have been posed the question as to whether it would be a viable option to apply Keyword Replacement to pages in order to replace redundant terminology.  There are a vast number of pages therefore to have content editors run through all the content....

 

My thoughts on this are that this is not ideal:

  • as words replaced may be taken out of context as there is no proofing occuring - words that should not be replaced will be.
  • if keywords are found as part of HTML code/css this could impact on renderering/function of content.
  • special characters are not considered and therefore would require additional conditions applied
  • general system performance - especially with multiple replacements within large blocks of content.

And in addition not so much related the technical side:

  • overall administration - which words do we filter and who controls them

Has anyone tried this?  Were you successful or did it cause issues? And are there any possible workarounds?

 

I was considering using a search to list the pages that would be impacted and grouping them to author then using this to alert authors that they had pages requiring update - would this be considered a viable option or should we just get the content authors to review their own work?

 

Any and all help appreciated.

Tonkle.


(Nic Hubbard) #2

I was considering using a search to list the pages that would be impacted and grouping them to author then using this to alert authors that they had pages requiring update - would this be considered a viable option or should we just get the content authors to review their own work?

 

I am not sure a keyword replacement for large blocks of content is the best choice here. Have you looked into using the Search and Replace tool? It can work really well and you are able to review each instance that it is proposing to replace.

 

In the future content authors should for sure review their work.