Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/33494
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

I concur that [Does DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) Apply to Documentation?](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/33529/does-dry-dont-repeat-yourself-apply-to-documentation) pretty much answers the question on what is best for the user.

However, the question was:

> Which one is more futureproof? (This tool is here to stay so there is no replacement option.)

In your case, as much as I don't want to say this - referring might turn out better in the long run. Here's why:

1. As time goes by, you'll keep on accumulating duplicate, hard-coded content. 
2. At some point it will become impossible to maintain it, so you'll begin offering outdated or erroneous content to customers.
3. Your users will not be able to do their job because they'll be getting outdated content.
4. You'll end up with bad content and unhappy users.

With your particular setup, I'd say that "correct content available through timely and accurate referral" trumps "all the content in the right place at the right time".

Original score: 6