From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 2-MAR-1996 08:58:01.65 To: CIRJA02 CC: Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9601B" Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 08:37:02 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9601B" To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 11:50:48 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carolyn Weaver Subject: Indexes in Word 7.0 ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I just migrated to Windows 95/Office95. I'm somewhat concerned that there is no explicit 'save as Word for Windows 6.0' command in Word 7.0. For those of you who have migrated to MS Word 7.0 under Win95, have you had any problems with sending a client using Word 6.0 a file saved under Word 7.0? Or is it safest to send it as a Word 2.0 file? If this sounds off-topic, it's not! I have a number of clients who request Word files on disk; and I don't want to send something they can't read. Advice?? Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, Wa. e-mail: cweaver@u.washington.edu voice: 206/930-4348 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 11:50:59 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Nan Badgett <76400.3351@compuserve.com> Subject: Genus/species spell checker ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I index a fair number of gardening books and would like to find a spell checker that includes scientific names of plants and flowers that I could use with Cindex. Does anyone know of such a thing? I know I can create my own dictionary in Cindex, but do not want to spend time reinventing the wheel if it's been done. Thanks, Nan Badgett Word-a-bil-i-ty ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 11:51:14 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Conroy Subject: Re: Cookbook indexes In-Reply-To: <199601050017.QAA05902@biggulp.callamer.com> ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Cindy, I normally charge MORE for cookbooks than regular texts, because most publishers not only want the recipes indexed by title or type, but by major ingredients and sometimes even other criteria. A single recipe might then have as many as four, five, or six locators! So I would charge my regular rate for the pages with "only" nutritional information, and charge extra for the recipe sections. And if there was only a minimal amount of nutritional information, the whole book would go for the higher rate. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 14:05:52 ECT Reply-To: grant@onyxgfx.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: Grant Hogarth Organization: Onyx Graphics Corp. Subject: Usage Question: Claris the Cow-dog ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Does anybody know if this "name" is protected/Registered/TM'd etc. ? (I'm referring to the little critter that shows alignment & rotation of an image on the page) Grant (x-posted to Index-L, Winhlp-L, and Techwr-L) ===================================== Grant Hogarth, Information Developer Onyx Graphics Corp. Midvale, UT www.onyxgfx.com ftp.onyxgfx.com #include "Men are not prisoners of fate, but only prisoners of their own minds." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 14:07:26 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@aol.com Subject: Re: Genus/species spell checker ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Nan, I recall recently getting a solicitation from either Williams & Wilkins or W.B. Saunders, both scientific/medical publishers, advertising dictionaries that can be used with Word Perfect (not Cindex). There were dictionaries for different medical areas or specialties, and other scientific dictionaries, meant for transcriptionists, physicians, medical writers, scientists, etc. Sorry I'm not remembering better. I didn't pay too much attention, because they didn't have much for Microsoft Word users (me), so I tossed it out and didn't retain the info. Your best bet would be to try one of them to see if you can locate the product. Not too expensive, either, as I recall. Under $100. Good luck in your search. Wish I could help more. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 14:07:45 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@aol.com Subject: Re: Genus/species spell checker ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- In a message dated 96-01-08 12:16:08 EST, Nan wrote: >I index a fair number of gardening books and would like to find a spell >checker >that includes scientific names of plants and flowers that I could use with >Cindex. Along the same lines, I would be happy to find a reference that one could look up species names and find the genus (especially for microorganisms, but higher plants and animals would be a bonus) and whether a given organism is a yeast vs. a bacterium, etc. (Though that's implicit in the nomenclature, not all of us are familiar with all nuances of taxonomy.) Indexing organism names can really become a problem when the author does not spell out the genus name but simply writes, for example, "E. coli" instead of "Escherichia coli" and the client wants the genus name spelled out in the index. Online resources would be very acceptable as I'm in the habit of going online to find solutions to indexing problems when printed dictionaries, etc. don't resolve the issue. Given the huge number of organisms on our planet, I'm probably dreaming here, but am giving it a shot anyway. Thanks in advance to any H. sapiens (indexus or librarianus subspecies) out there with a solution. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 09:47:36 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@aol.com Subject: Re: Indexes in Word 7.0 ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Is there a file format listed in the Save As db for previous versions of Word? Down below the area where you specify the file name you want to save a file as? I would alos be interested to know if there is a way to get Word 7.0 to save as Mac Word version xx, since I have clients who need indexes in Mac format. Horrors if there isn't! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 09:47:45 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Matt Miller Subject: Re: Indexes in Word 7.0 In-Reply-To: <199601081717.JAA29728@mail5> ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On Mon, 8 Jan 1996, Carolyn Weaver wrote: > For those of you who have migrated to MS Word 7.0 under Win95, have you had > any problems with sending a client using Word 6.0 a file saved under > Word 7.0? Yes, I had trouble. > Or is it safest to send it as a Word 2.0 file? Why not? Matt Miller memiller@netcom.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 09:47:53 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carolyn Weaver Subject: Re: Genus/species spell checker In-Reply-To: <9601081936.AA29210@carson.u.washington.edu> ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Not exactly a spell checker, BUT... There is a lovely searchable Dictionary of Cell Biology online at http://www.mblab.gla.ac.uk/~julian/Dict.html (There's a link to this one on the ASI Home Page under Reference Sources.) Cornell University also has an online/searchable Pathology glossary at gopher://guru.med.cornell.edu:70/77/.indexes/path4 (Webmasters, I suggest this for the ASI page as well). Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, Wa. e-mail: cweaver@u.washington.edu voice: 206/930-4348 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 09:48:02 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: MCLAUGHB@cgs.edu Subject: ASI SoCal Conference Proceedings ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I'm forwarding this for Anne Leach in reply to Ed Gootzait's query about ASI SoCal Conference Proceedings. *********************** Sorry--we'll not be publishing proceedings of our conference. Our speakers are all volunteering their time and travel expenses. We didn't wish to add the task of preparing a formal paper to the burdens they're willing to carry on our behalf, nor do we have the wherewithal to transcribe and edit tape recordings. However, we will be taping the formal talks and Q&A periods (but not the luncheon roundtable discussions), and will be glad to sell you a set of copies of the tapes for $35. Send your check to me, Anne Leach, at the address listed in the Key Words masthead, along with mailing instructions, and I'll see that you get a set of tapes. Thanks for your interest...............Anne Leach **************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 09:48:11 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Converted from OV/VM to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X From: NASEM020@sivm.si.edu Subject: Re: Genus/species spell checker In-Reply-To: note of 01/08/96 14:05 ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Lynn Moncrief asks about resources for getting the genus for a given species name. For vertebrates, I often use field guides to get the whole or correct spellings. Unfortunately, taxonomists often use the same species name for a variety of different species (even among verts and inverts there may be a common species name!). I also find texbooks and clinical references a big help. Another point - the author (copyeditor) should ensure at least one full spell out of all scientific names within the text before resorting to shortened names. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 09:48:23 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rollie Littlewood Subject: Re: Usage Question: Claris the Cow-dog ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- At 02:05 PM 1/8/96 ECT, grant@onyxgfx.com wrote: >Does anybody know if this "name" is protected/Registered/TM'd etc. ? > >(I'm referring to the little critter that shows alignment & rotation >of an image on the page) > >Grant Yes, Clarus, the dogcow is a registered trademark of Apple Computer (since about 1987). Like many other weighty issues in this world, it has been the subject of a dispute between Apple and Microsoft; this seems to have been part of the reason that Apple registered it as a trademark. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 09:48:36 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Barbara S. Littlewood" <75223.1545@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Genus/species spelling ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I have found a good reference book for plant species names: A Checklist of Names of 3,000 Vascular Plants of Economic Importance, by Edward E. Terrell et al. (USDA/ARS, 1986, Agriculture Handbook #505). It has both a "common name to species name" section and a "species name to common name" section. Barb Littlewood ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 14:32:38 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@aol.com Subject: Indexes in the news--sort of ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hello everyone, Here's something I thought folks would enjoy, from the Washington Post, Monday, January 8, 1996, "The Reliable Source," by Annie Groer and Ann Gerhart: "None of the usual Washington parlor games can be played with Hillary Rodham Clinton's meditation on child-rearing, "It Takes a Village (And Other Lessons Children Teach US)." There is no index, for instance, with which to quickly check whether the first lady believes Sen. Alfonse D'Amato (R-N.Y.) is the product of bad parenting. The new book is dedicated to "the family that raised me, the family I joined and the family we made." --cheers from snowbound Annapolis, MD! Pilar Wyman Indexing Tel/Fax: 410-263-7537 Email:PilarW@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 14:32:47 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@aol.com Subject: Re: Genus/species spell checker ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Lynn et al. Amen to NASEM020! Any editor worth his/her salt will see to it that the genus/species name for each plant or organism or animal is written out completely at least once. Just as you shouldn't have to figure out what the complete name is, neither should the reader. I don't think we're paid enough to do this kind of research, nor should we accept the responsibility. I'd either put the name in as shown or point the flaw out to the editor and ask what the name is. I would discuss this point with the editor, since covering yourself is important, professionally. You aren't responsible for putting more into that book than the author has -- yet you are responsible for the index. A tricky business, actually. Another point. What if you make an error in your decision about the genus. That would be unfortunate. I've often written out Escherichia coli where I knew that's what E. coli meant. But when the author starts using B. campylobacter, I'm not sure whether B. is Bacillus, or something else. Similarly for S. something. S can stand for so many things. But, I draw the line at hours of research in order to be able to list genus/species completely. Do others feel as I do? Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 14:32:57 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JClendenen@aol.com Subject: Re: Indexes in Word 7.0 ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I just obtained Word for Windows 95, amongst other things on this massive hard disk, and under Save As, in the box marked Save as type, they have all kinds of options, including Word 6.0 (down near the bottom of the list), Word for various Mac versions, just about every option I could think of. Joanne (Trying to learn CINDEX and a whole other world of PC (wow!) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 14:33:07 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carolyn Weaver Subject: Re: Indexes in Word 7.0 In-Reply-To: <9601091458.AA10304@carson.u.washington.edu> ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- There are 'save as' options for W4W 2.0; Word for Mac versions 4.0, 5.0, 5.1; WordPerfect 5.0 and 5.1 for both DOS and Windows, plain text, and RTF - but no Word 6.0! Which is why I raised the question. So until somebody provides proof that 6.0 users can read 7.0, I will probably resort to giving 6.0 users files in WFW 2.0 AND RTF as well, just for insurance. Carolyn On Tue, 9 Jan 1996 JanCW@aol.com wrote: > ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- > Is there a file format listed in the Save As db for previous versions of > Word? Down below the area where you specify the file name you want to save a > file as? I would alos be interested to know if there is a way to get Word > 7.0 to save as Mac Word version xx, since I have clients who need indexes in > Mac format. > > Horrors if there isn't! > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 14:33:16 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Macrex@aol.com Subject: Re: Indexes in Word 7.0 ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- In a message dated 96-01-08 12:15:36 EST, Carolyn Weaver asked about saving files in Word/Win95 for use by those with Word 6.0 I would recommend sending an RTF file rather than a Word file. In creating files for Word users including everything from DOS to Windows to Macintosh and covering all versions, I've never had a problem sending an RTF but have often found problems in the Word converter for other versions of Word. Gale Rhoades Director Macrex Sales & Support File ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:42:40 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Blask@aol.com Subject: INDEXING WITH FRAMEMAKER/WINDOWS ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I am interested in any information on providing macro-like shortcuts while using the Framemaker marker system. Also, does anyone have suggestions on organizing one's entries systematically, as Cindex seems to do in DOS. As it is set up, I see no alternative to keeping, e.g., a separate set of cross-references unless you expect to do a mammoth editing job. Another possibility might be other indexing software that works in Windows to handle major entries & subentries, while reserving the Framemaker markers for longer names that are not really categories. The two could then be combined, edited & sorted. Appreciate any feedback on this. Blask@AOL.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:15:14 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard S. Day" Subject: Re: Indexes in Word 7.0 ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On 9 January at 14:33, you wrote: > ------------------------Original message---------------------------- [snip] > So until somebody provides proof that 6.0 users can read 7.0, I will > probably resort to giving 6.0 users files in WFW 2.0 AND RTF as well, > just for insurance. Carolyn WFW 2.0 is sufficiently different from 6 and 7 that quite a lot of formatting information could be lost in the transition. 7.0 is really no more than a 'maintenance' upgrade to 6.0, with a few new bells and whistles thrown in (e.g. on-the-fly spell checking). The underlying formatting 'engine' is barely changed at all. The one area of difference which might be important is long versus short filenames. Other than that, Saving a 7.0 file in 6.0 format and passing it to someone with Word 6 should cause no problems. Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:15:58 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@aol.com Subject: Re: Indexes in the news--sort of ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- We ought to send Ms. Clinton a little note about indexes in books, and how we make our living... Fer shame fer shame! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:16:16 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Simon Butler Subject: Indexing and Information Mapping ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hi, I have a question regarding the techniques of indexing a manual/document which has been prepared using the Information Mapping methodology. Briefly, Information Mapping involves breaking the document down into 'chunks' each containing information on one topic thus making the information more easily accessible. The Information Mapping course handbook `Developing Procedures, Policies & Documentation' offers only a passing reference to indexing and recommends the use of Map, Block and Sub-Block labels as index entries. This will produce an alphabetical table of contents which is *not*, IMHO, an index. I have contacted Information Mapping (the company) here in the UK and was informed that, as Information Mapping increases the accessibility of information, the need for an index is reduced and the technique mentioned in the text is adequate . In the documentation department in which I work as a Technical Author (yes, I write as well as index) we are currently investigating a way forward for indexing Information Mapped documents. If anyone out there has assistance or thoughts to offer, can you please eMail me direct at the address below. Thanks in advance for any help. Simon Butler MISTC Technical Author butlers@ecid.cig.mot.com tel +44 1793 541541 ext 328 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:17:29 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard S. Day" Subject: Re: Genus/species spell checker ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On 9 January at 14:32, you wrote: > -------------------------Original message---------------------------- > Lynn et al. > > Amen to NASEM020! Any editor worth his/her salt will see to it that > the genus/species name for each plant or organism or animal is > written out completely at least once. Just as you shouldn't have to > figure out what the complete name is, neither should the reader. I > don't think we're paid enough to do this kind of research, nor should > we accept the responsibility. [large snip] > Do others feel as I do? Janet Absolutely!! I spent more than two decades in the trade/technical publishing business and the same amount of time threatening the livelihood of editors who "forgot" to fully spell out a technical term before they abbreviated it the first time. My case was simple: the editor might well be thoroughly familiar with the term and inclined to use its abbreviated form in everyday speech and writing, but that knowledge did not give the editor the right to confuse or distract the average reader, who very likely would not know what the abbreviation stood for. I still cringe when I see publications, ranging from "general, consumer" through to esoteric, specialist texts, which abbreviate willy nilly and expect me and all other readers to know what each abbreviation stands for. I still remember, and shudder at an article which appeared in one of my magazines: dealing with recent developments in liquid crystal display (LCD) technology, the article started with a sentence like this: "TN LCDs, just now coming out of Swiss laboratories, are likely to dominate the small display applications arena..." The article went on for another 4,000 or so words, with "TN LCD" mentioned repeatedly. I thought I knew something about the subject (I knew the people who developed liquid crystal display technology), but I had absolutely no idea what 'TN' stood for! I hauled the editor into my office and was told, "Oh, it stands for twisted nematic." I then called a very senior executive at Sharp Electronics in Osaka, Japan, who were at that time the world's largest users of LCD technology. He had no idea what 'TN LCD' stood for and was no more enlightened when I explained the abbreviation. The article was, in short, a disaster and I insisted on a follow-up explanation of the technology, in simple English, in the next issue. In my view, an editor who allows unexplained abbreviations should at minimum consider his or her job to be 'on probation'... Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:17:54 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard S. Day" Subject: Re: Indexes in Word 7.0 ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On 9 January at 14:33, Gale Rhoades wrote: > ------------------------Original message---------------------------- > In a message dated 96-01-08 12:15:36 EST, Carolyn Weaver asked about > saving files in Word/Win95 for use by those with Word 6.0 > > I would recommend sending an RTF file rather than a Word file. In > creating files for Word users including everything from DOS to > Windows to Macintosh and covering all versions, I've never had a > problem sending an RTF but have often found problems in the Word > converter for other versions of Word. > This is a generally very good suggestion, but I do have one caveat: Microsoft made some changes to the RTF specification when it released Word 6, the result being that a Word 6 RTF file might not import with complete success into Word 2. Usually, the transfer will work; but I would suggest testing with a small file which is representative of what you will be doing, before you commit to anything really large! There have been some further changes to the RTF spec. with Word 7, but from what I have seen I do not think they will impact most users (the changes reflect some of the more esoteric and probably rarely used features of the program). I follow the RTF specification closely because we write filters to import-export RTF for our software, in case you are wondering ;-) Ric ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:20:39 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Isawriter@aol.com Subject: Re: Genus/species spell checker ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Lynn.... Many of my dictionaries seem to be from Microlytics, a subsidiary or division of Xerox. Have you tried writing them directly? Their addresses are: http://www.microlytics.com info@microlytics.com Pardon if you covered this in the original query, which is long since gone from my system. Good luck! Craig Brown :{) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:20:57 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Presley, Paula" Subject: Indexing in FrameMaker I have used FrameMaker (Mac and Windows) since version 3.0. I have used Word (DOS and windows); I have used WP, WordStar, you-name-it...I go back as far as the Commodore. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL I EVER AGAIN WASTE MY TIME TRYING TO INDEX WITH FRAMEMAKER. Their own rep said essentially the same thing at our 1994 annual meeting. I asked him how FrameMaker wa able to make those wonderful indexes with their terrible system of markers. He said in his speech that FrameMaker hired a professional indexer, who uses Macrex, to make the indexes...then they inserted the FrameMaker markers to suit their purposes. One of my colleagues insisted he could make a simple analyzed index with FrameMaker...faster and beter than I can with Cindex. Well, it took him two weeks to index a book of about 120 pages...and we had to redo it with Cindex! (Experience is sometimes a hard taskmistress!). So, my advice is to use your Cindex or Macrex. (I use my Cindex on Mac with Universal Soft PC [at work]; on DOS at home). >----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >I am interested in any information on providing macro-like shortcuts while >using the Framemaker marker system. Also, does anyone have suggestions on >organizing one's entries systematically, as Cindex seems to do in DOS. As >it is set up, I see no alternative to keeping, e.g., a separate set of >cross-references unless you expect to do a mammoth editing job. Another >possibility might be other indexing software that works in Windows to handle >major entries & subentries, while reserving the Framemaker markers for longer >names that are not really categories. The two could then be combined, edited >& sorted. Appreciate any feedback on this. >Blask@AOL.com ________________________________________________________________ Paula Presley FAX 816-785-4181 VOICE 816-785-4525 Associate Editor, Thomas Jefferson University Press Northeast Missouri State Univ. (Truman State University July 96) McClain Hall 111-L, 100 E. Normal St., Kirksville, MO 63501-4221 Internet: ppresley%nemomus@nemostate.edu ________________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 10:21:50 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: WordenDex@aol.com Subject: Re: Genus/species spell checker ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I draw the line at "hours of research" too, but I do two searches in any case: (1) look in at-home references available to me including the online MicroSoft Bookshelf which has hit the botanical names I need more often than not, field guides and bio textbooks, and a print Encyc Britannica, and (2) ask the reference staff at my public library or local university for help. These take less than 15 minutes total. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 09:48:09 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Larry Harrison Subject: Re: Indexing in FrameMaker ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Paula Presley wrote: >I have used FrameMaker (Mac and Windows) since version 3.0. I have used >Word (DOS and windows); I have used WP, WordStar, you-name-it...I go >back as far as the Commodore. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL I EVER AGAIN >WASTE MY TIME TRYING TO INDEX WITH FRAMEMAKER. Their own rep said >essentially the same thing at our 1994 annual meeting. I asked him how >FrameMaker wa able to make those wonderful indexes with their terrible >system of markers. He said in his speech that FrameMaker hired a >professional indexer, who uses Macrex, to make the indexes...then they >inserted the FrameMaker markers to suit their purposes. Yes, in fact a representative of Frame Technology described the process at a national ASI meeting (San Diego or Washington, DC?). Everyone found this very revealing as to the capabilities and limitations of Framemaker. In addition, please be aware that Nancy Mulvany is perhaps the world's expert on embedded indexing and its problems, and has written extensively on this subject. I suggest you inquire as to the accessibility of some of her papers on The WELL. Larry Harrison (larryh@millcomm.com) 507/280-0049 Freelance book indexing Rochester, Minnesota "It's 1996... Do you know where your Year-2000 software glitches are? ...Don't you wish everybody did?" ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 09:48:19 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Frank Stearns Subject: Re: Indexing in FrameMaker In-Reply-To: from "Presley, Paula" at Jan 10, 96 10:20:57 am ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- > > I have used FrameMaker (Mac and Windows) since version 3.0. I have used > Word (DOS and windows); I have used WP, WordStar, you-name-it...I go > back as far as the Commodore. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL I EVER AGAIN > WASTE MY TIME TRYING TO INDEX WITH FRAMEMAKER. Their own rep said Indeed; FM markers are a pain. We have a collection of tools, bundled in an API product called IXgen, which make indexing much more doable. Not quite as slick a Macrex or Cindex, but far, far better than the native system. For the time being, however, IXgen is only offered on SunOS or Solaris (Sun) workstations. We had hoped to port this to windows several months ago, but are waiting on a number of issues. If you'd like more information on IXgen, please contact us. (If you remember the name of the rep, please send that to us. We'd like to let him or her know IXgen exists.) + --------------------------------------------------------------------- + | Frank Stearns Associates | Developers of Tools for FrameMaker(r): | | franks@fsatools.com | IXgen, FM2A, Programmable Export Kit | | 360/892-3970 fx:360/253-1498 | Developers of Custom Software Tools | + --------------------------------------------------------------------- + | http://www.pacifier.com/~franks (Email if web page access problems) | + --------------------------------------------------------------------- + ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 09:48:37 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@aol.com Subject: Re: Indexes in the news--sort of ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Jan, Great idea! In fact, I hear Ms. Clinton is going to be on the radio pretty soon (on the Diane Riehm show on NPR?) to tout the book. If anyone hears it, feel free to call in--I tend not to have the radio on while I'm indexing, so I'll probably miss it. Happy indexing all, Pilar "Indexers of the world, unite!" ;-) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 09:48:52 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Annblum@aol.com Subject: Re: Genus/species spell checker ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- In response to the genus and species issue: If you encounter this issue frequently, as I do with medical idexing, get yourself a copy of Dorland's Medical Dictionary (W.B. Saunders Co.)--they are all in here. Many relatively inexpensive reference books also list the widely used genus and species. I agree that it is the editor/copy editor's job to have supplied this information in the text, but if we are to create a complete, usable index, it is up to us to supply this information accurately. Just my opinion! Ann Blum ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 09:49:03 ECT Reply-To: grant@onyxgfx.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: Grant Hogarth Organization: Onyx Graphics Corp. Subject: Conclusion: Clarus the Cow-dog ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Well! :-) Thanks to all who responded. It was very helpful. (Even if my boss didn't believe me ) For people's reference, it is indeed "Clarus" the cow-dog. She is copyrighted by Apple, as is her trademark expression "Moof". This was all documented in Macintoch Technical Note #31. I can send people the additional info (it's quite funny) if they wish. Thanks again, Grant ===================================== Grant Hogarth, Information Developer Onyx Graphics Corp. Midvale, UT www.onyxgfx.com ftp.onyxgfx.com #include "Then you should say what you mean," the March Hare went on. "I do," Alice hastily replied; "at least--at least I mean what I say--that's the same thing, you know." "Not the same thing a bit!" said the Hatter. "Why, you might just as well say that 'I see what I eat' is the same thing as 'I eat what I see'!" -- Lewis Carroll ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 16:31:24 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: ASI Renewal address ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- To all members of ASI receiving renewal notices in January: You can cross out the address on the envelope and replace it with the new one: American Society of Indexers P.O. Box 48267 Seattle, WA 98148-0267 Elinor Lindheimer American Society of Indexers President P.O. Box 48267 American Society of Indexers Seattle, WA 98148-0267 P.O. Box 902 voice: (206) 241-9196 Mendocino, CA 95460 fax: (206) 727-6430 voice: (707) 937-1646 email: asi@well.com email: elinorl@mcn.org www: http://www.well.com/user/asi v ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 10:20:38 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: MaryMort@aol.com Subject: Re: Indexes in the news--sort of ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On the topic of people in Washington looking at indexes in bookstores, I saw the following in the NY Times Book Review of Nov. 5, 1995 (as I tried to catch up on my reading.) The review, by Martin Walker, is of _Call the Briefing! Bush and Reagan, Sam and Helen: A Decade with Presidents and the Press_ by Marlin Fitzwater. "The memoirs of Marlin Fitzwater, press secretary to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush and the most adroit and popular figure to hold the post since Pierre Salinger in the Kennedy Administration, will be much scanned in the nation's capital in that distinctive, dismissive Washington fashion. Index checked for chums and enemies, a chapter skimmed, the unbought book is returned to the shelf. That would be unfair to his book." Mary -- * Mary Mortensen * marymort@aol.com * 318 Main St. # 20 * 201-514-1710 * Madison, NJ 07940 * USA