From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 11-SEP-1996 16:41:30.52 To: CIRJA02 CC: Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9609B" Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:19:14 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9609B" To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:19:00 PDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Richard Wright-ARCHIVES Subject: Indexing newspapers The BBC has approx 22,000,000 newspaper cuttings - taken from a range of national and local papers over many decades. Indexing these is not, of course, the same as 'indexing a newspaper'. The approach used is I believe standard for such collections: folders filed by subject headings. The list of subject headings is not standard but is unique to the collection. It has 4800 preferred terms and 6000 lead-in terms, approx. Subjects are mainly people, countries, places (in general), and then all other subjects. The collections works in the sense that it answers approx 7500 enquiries per month (20 staff spread over 24-hr working). Obviously it is terribly old-fashioned to have physical holdings of newscuttings and we plan to digitise as soon as possible - after which we could actually electronically search not just the indexing but the text itself. I'm interested in anyone's views/experiences on what the recommended indexing would be for electronic newspapers. Richard Wright - Information Systems Engineer BBC Information & Archives Email: richard.wright@bbc.co.uk ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 14:08:10 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Crystal Fulton Subject: Teleworkers needed for study WANTED: Teleworkers/homeworkers to participate in a study of the changing patterns of work. If you are an information professional working at least one day a week outside the traditional office and you are interested in participating in this study, please call Crystal Fulton at (519) 661-2111, ext. 8516 or (519) 439-3103 or email at cfulton@julian.uwo.ca. I am a Ph.D. candidate at the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at The University of Western Ontario. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 14:02:17 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Sample indexes I've discussed this matter with a few people off-list, and at least one has suggested that I toss it out to you folks on Index-L. I've pretty much made up my mind what I'm gonna do, but I'd be interested in your input. Plus, I think this is an interesting situation. Not long ago, an editor called me about freelance indexing. Her publishing house intends to use more freelance indexers. She wanted to send me material to index. The material would come from one of the press's books that'd already been indexed and published. The same material would be sent to any number of freelance indexers, and then the editor would compare the indexes and decide whom to use as a freelancer. Indexers would not be paid to produce these samples. Each sample (and I would be receiving two) was about thirty pages long. The editor said she didn't want to receive samples of indexes I have already prepared. She said that they might not be on topics her press publishes. Also, my indexes may have already been edited by the publisher for which I'd worked. As it turns out, I've indexed a number of books on one of this press's big topics. I mentioned this to the editor. She did not want to see these indexes, however. Only people who have an academic degree in this subject area are allowed to index it. Reactions? Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "But a lifetime of happiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth."--George Bernard Shaw ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 21:51:03 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Daveream@AOL.COM Subject: Baby Sinclair I believe this would be a reference to the youngest child on the TV show "Dinosaurs". A great show no longer on the air. Kind of a muppets meets the Honeymooners/Donna Reed. Although Baby Sinclairs most oft quoted line, after he did something wrong, was: "I'm the baby, gotta love me"! ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 09:22:42 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Linda B. Clifford" Subject: Suggestion Hi all, I'm a rookie here, so be kind. When I subscribed to Index-L about two months ago, the traffic on the list was very light. It seems that the discussion of rates has boosted the level of activity. Like when the host brings out the really _Good_wine and the party livens up. Over at Copyediting-L, the CEL-mates have a system for naming your subject when posting to the list. From the Guidelines to using the list: Create your own as needed to fit your subject-- check the list of "limited use" and "banned" tags below. USAGE: usage or grammar issue STYLE: style issue ESSAY: general thoughts on an editing topic JOURN: newspaper-editing issue BOOKS: reference book TOOLS: editing tool that isn't a book WORK: work-related issue (e.g., payment, horror story) JOB OP: employment opportunity HUMOR: humorous editing chat TRIVIA: bit of knowledge only an editor would want QUERY: question that doesn't fit a subject tag --> LIMITED USE CHAT: discussion loosely related to editing StyleFAQ: used by the compilers of Copyediting-L's style file ATTN: message for a specific person (use only if you can't send it to the person's e-mail address) PROT: (PROTOCOL) comment on how the list should be used (consider sending it to the listowner first) HELP: reserved for seeking help from the listowner (send message to the listowner) --> BANNED ADMIN: (reserved for the listowner's use) FLAME: (send message directly to intended recipient) COPYEDITING-L digest ###: (be more specific) The category begins the subject line, followed by a colon, then the specifics. A posting from today's list might be headed: HUMOR: Macs at Microsoft. Certainly, all these categories would not work for Index-L, but could we come up with something that suited us? The great advantage to these keywords is in saving time, and allowing the reader to easily focus on what is of interest to him/her. (Being PC is such a pain) I find the longer a list is, the more likely I am to delete it because I don't have the time, and saving it for later only makes the pile bigger. (guilt, guilt, guilt) Sometimes I ignore all the CHAT, and focus on STYLE & USAGE because there is a lot to be learned there. Sometimes I really need a laugh, so I zoom in on the HUMOR. So, what do you think? Is this appropriate for us? BTW, thank you all for being so willing to share your rates and experiences. It has been of great value to me. Ta, Linda ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Parse-Snip: Headline: Stolen Painting Found By Tree Linda B. Clifford lbcliff@sover.net ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 09:20:04 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Great Price-Fixing Conspiracy In a message dated 96-09-06 18:00:47 EDT, Lynn wrote: << how this whole discussion could be interpreted by us fiercely independent types in the indexing community >> Lynn, As usual, you have done a stupendous job here. Thank you, Thank you, Thank you. You hit the nail on the head, both with regard to creativity and to (freelance) indexer independence. --I had trouble putting into words before why I felt so uncomfortable 'in my undies' out here, posting my own rates. It's that darned independent spirit, I see. Thank goodness our dock didn't get so flooded that our sailboat didn't just sail away. --I'm outta here! ... Have a good weekend, everybody, Pilar Wyman Indexing Annapolis, MD Tel/Fax: 410-263-7537 Email: PilarW@aol.com "What is indexing?" -----> http://www.well.com/user/asi/indfaq.htm ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 19:17:40 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jennifer J Shakal Subject: CINDEX Help Requested Since this is my first posting, a quick introduction. My name is Jennifer Shakal and I have been indexing for about a year. I have done about 7 or 8 indexes, mostly using just WordPerfect. Finally, on my most recent job, I decided I *had* to have dedicated indexing software and decided on CINDEX. I am very glad I got it because I cannot imagine this job using WordPerfect. It is a very dense index. I hope this isn't an INDEX-L no-no asking specifically for help on CINDEX but I am in kind of a bind. I work fulltime at the public library here in Eau Claire, WI and do my indexing nights and weekends. So here it is Saturday night and I need help and no CINDEX tech support until Monday morning. It has been difficult to learn CINDEX while working on a project but up to this point it has gone relatively smoothly. I have everything input and am now ready to export from CINDEX to WordPerfect 6.1. CINDEX is not sorting the records the way I need it to. All of the entries that have quotation marks are sorted at the beginning of the index, before the A's. I have searched the manual and the help screens for a way to tell CINDEX to ignore beginning quotes in alphabetizing but cannot find it. I'm sure there is some simple way to set this, as you can set so many other things in CINDEX but I am at a loss as to what it is. A second question, that I could fix manually, but again I'm sure there must be a way to tell CINDEX to do it, is this: how to tell CINDEX to wrap run-over lines one indent (5 spaces). For example, for long titles that go over one line in length. If anyone out there is an experienced CINDEX user and wouldn't mind giving me a few pointers until I learn it better, I would really appreciate it. After a year and a half of lurking on INDEX-L I get the feeling I'm not the only one working late on Saturday nights! TIA! Jennifer J. Shakal jnshakal@cvfn.org 2817 Comet Court Eau Claire, WI 54703 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 23:17:53 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Editing tips? In a message dated 96-09-06 11:27:49 EDT, MH wrote: > I just finished a monster index -- not big. Just details, definitions, > facts on every page -- maybe every paragraph and ideas and themes > repeated many times with many examples using diffferent terms. Terms > whose meaning was only a hair different. MH, Could you give us some examples of these terms that are only a shade different? In some cases, when you have a gnarly index with terminology running out of control and a gazillion See alsos, you can bring some order to it by shoehorning some nearly identical concepts under a higher-level term that neatly covers them all. Thesauri, dictionaries, etc. are a big help in ensuring accuracy when you do this. I don't know if you were here about a month ago for the "T-lymphocyte" thread. But to use that as an example, let's say that you have Th1 cells and Th2 cells, with perhaps one reference to each, you could create a main heading for T helper cells covering both or have a subentry under T-lymphocytes for Th- or T helper-lymphocytes. One potential problem though with shoehorning stuff under higher level concepts is that your index loses "granularity" or "resolution" so to speak, when they are not broken out separately as main headings. Whether this granularity is necessary or desireable depends on many factors, including the audience for the book, space allotted for the index, etc. It would probably help us answer your question if you told us more about the book itself. > > How do the rest of you go about editing an index for a ms like this? > I kept reaching for "the index" and had to keep reminding myself > "you're creating it you ninny!" ROFL! I've found myself doing that myself at times! ;-D However, your problem sounds like one that affects the actual indexing as well as the editing process. > > Anyway, I'm preparing to do another like it next week and I'm just > wondering if you experts can share any tricks for indexeses where > you want to add a "See also" for every word! Again, how you handle your See alsos depends somewhat on your audience and the type of book. For example, if a lot of the entries to which you want to tack on See alsos are adjacent to each other in the index, you may be able to skip those particular references. To use the T-lymphocyte example again, if you have a main heading for CD4 cells and another for CD8 cells, you wouldn't need a "See also CD8 cells" from your CD4 cell heading. Secondly, if your audience is very technically or scientifically literate, you may be able to get away without using some of the See alsos as the existence of the targets in the index is likely to be obvious to the reader. (The hard part is deciding how likely they are to be obvious.) A scientist aware of the concept of CD4 cells in an immunology text is very likely to be aware of the existence of CD8 cells in the T-lymphocyte zoo (aside from their proximity in the index). However, a layperson reading a book on AIDS (written for laypeople) that not only discusses T-lymphocytes but the CD4-cell subset may not know about CD4 cells, let alone that they are a subset of T-helper cells, and needs to be helped with a See also. Hope this helps some. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 22:46:13 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: KINGH@SNYSYRV1.BITNET Subject: Re: Indexing of CD-ROMs I did indexing for an in-house database and the designers set strick limits on the number of terms I could use from their thesaurus. They dislike ERIC, because though recal is high precision is low. They wanted very high precision and high recall only on current articles. Keyword searching is unlimited indexing and the retrieval in even the specialized databases quickly becomes unmanageable. I read an article on the very carefully designed database for articles on worms (yes worms just articles that had to do with worms) for the relatively small community of scientists working in this area. The precision/recall problem was not solved. HMKing (kingh@vax.cs.hscsyr.edu) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 17:46:14 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Re: Editing and writing organizations (4) >From: md2013@mail.eclipse.co.uk >Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 20:52:41 +0000 >To: hazel blumberg-mckee >Subject: Re: Editing and writing organizations (4) > >Part 4 > >Fax: +1-212-995-0757 >WWW: > >Excerpted from the web site: >PRSA has 109 chapters throughout the United States grouped into ten >geographical districts. Members can choose to belong to one or more of the >Society's 16 Professional-Interest Sections. Sections offer members the >opportunity to explore issues and concerns unique to their fields of >specialization. Membership is open to an individual who devotes a >substantial portion of time to the paid professional practice of public >relations or to the teaching or administering of public relations courses >in an accredited college or university. > >======================= >Society for Technical Communication (STC) >901 N Stuart Street >Suite 904 >Arlington VA 22203-1854 USA >Phone: +1-703-522-4114 >Fax: +1-703-522-2075 >WWW: > >Excerpted from the web site: >The mission of the Society for Technical Communication is to improve the >quality and effectiveness of technical communication for audiences >worldwide. STC has more than 20,000 members and 141 chapters worldwide. >Members are technical communicators in a wide variety of disciplines: >writers and editors; graphic artists and technical illustrators; managers >and supervisors; educators and students; independent consultants and >contractors; photographers and audiovisual specialists. > >STC's Annual Conference brings together more than 2,000 technical >communicators from around the world for educational programs, seminars, and >workshops conducted by experts in the field. Upcoming annual conference >sites and dates: Seattle, May 5-8, 1996; Toronto, May 11-14, 1997; Anaheim, >May 17- 20, 1998; and Cincinnati, May 16-19, 1999. > >Chapter Activities, Competitions, Employment Information, Professional >Interest Committees, Research Grants, Scholarships > >Publications: >Technical Communication, STC's highly acclaimed quarterly journal publishes >thought-provoking articles on subjects of interest to all technical >communicators. Intercom, STC's magazine, published ten times each year, >contains timely professional articles as well as Society news. Tieline, the >monthly chapter leaders' newsletter offers advice and serves as an idea >exchange for chapter officers. Reference materials, manuals, anthologies, >standards, and booklets help both novice and experienced technical >communicators develop and expand their professional skills. > >======================= >Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) >P.O. Box 77 >16 South Jackson Street >Greencastle IN 46135-0077 USA >Phone: +1-317-653-3333 >Fax: +1-317-653-4631 >WWW: > >Excerpted from the web site: >Eligibility: The Society is an organization of 13,500 persons involved in >the direction of, editorial policy of, the editing of and the preparation >of news and editorial content of independent news editorial products, and >teachers and students engaged in the study of those areas. The eligibility >criteria are broad in the number of persons who will qualify under them, >but narrow in making it clear the Society is dedicated to professionalism >and the purely editorial function of the profession. > >Benefits >Quill Magazine >A personalized membership card including a copy of the First Amendment. The >opportunity to utilize the Society's credit card, travel benefits and in >insurance program. Professional development meetings, workshops and mission >committees at the l ocal and national level. Legal advice and support if >your First Amendment rights are violated. Information, publications and >guidelines concerning Freedom of Information i ssues, state sunshine laws >and ethical standards in journalism. An invitation to participate in one of >the country's oldest and most prestig ious journalism awards programs, The >Sigma Delta Chi Awards. The opportunity to meet, talk and network with >professionals in your area at your local chapter meetings. > >======================= >Women in Communications, Inc. (WICI) >National Service Office >10605 Judicial Dr. #A-4 >Fairfax, Virginia 22030 USA >Phone: +1-703-359-9000 >Fax: +1-703-359-0603 >E-mail: >WWW: (under construction) > >The organization has members, men and women, active in all fields of >communications, including journalism, public relations, advertising, >graphics, corporate communications, photography, publishing, TV/radio/film, >teaching and technical writing. There are chapters in most major U.S. >cities. > >======================= >Women in Scholarly Publishing (WISP) >The MIT University Press >55 Hayward >Cambridge MA 02142-1399 USA >Phone: +1-617-253-5642 >Fax: +1-617-258-6779 >E-mail: > >The membership of WISP is open to all who work in scholarly or university >press publishing or in auxiliary, related professions who actively support >the principles of equal rights and equal opportunity for women and >minorities. > >WISP-L (Women in Scholarly Publishing) >Subscribers to WISP-L must formally belong to the WISP organization. WISP-L >is provided as a forum for discussion among members of Women in Scholarly >Publishing, a non-profit feminist organization devoted to the encouragement >of education and professional advancement for its members. > >======================= >National Writers Union >873 Broadway, Suite 203 >New York, NY 10003 >Phone: +1-212-254-0279 >Fax: +1212-254-0673 >E-mail: > >A 4,000-member union which is a local of the United Auto Workers. It helps >with grievances, education, writer's rights, insurance, job banks, >contracts, and more. > >======================= >Society of Writers, Editors and Translators (SWET) >1-6-45 Sakae-cho >Asaka-shi >Saitama 351 JAPAN >Fax: +81-(0)484-68-7475 > >Annual dues are 5,000 yen. Members are entitled to the SWET Newsletter >(published bimonthly), Directory (published annually), and other benefits. >(training sessions, speakers' meetings, social gatherings, etc.) > >The SWET-L mailing list: Send an e-mail message to > with the message >Subscribe SWET-L Firstname Lastname > >Feel free to leave the subject line blank--the computer will ignore it >anyway. You will then get a message back asking you to confirm that you >want to subscribe and that your e-mail address is right. The list is open >to non-SWET members, so feel free to tell your Japan-interested writer, >editor and translator friends. > >======================= >Singapore Society of Editors >35 Bright Hill Crescent >Singapore 2057 > >======================= >New Zealand Book Editors' Association (NZBEA) >Brian O'Flaherty >PO Box 99-259 >Newmarket >Auckland NZ >Phone: +64-9-3600-412 >It publishes a _Directory of Freelancers_ (latest edition 1995-1996) and >has a Christmas dinner. > >======================= >Australian Society of Indexers >The Honorary Secretary >GPO Box 1251 >Melbourne, Vic. 3001 AUSTRALIA >WWW: > >The objectives of the Society are: >to improve the quality of indexing in Australia >to promote the training, continuing professional development, status and >interest of indexers in Australia to act as an advisory body on indexing >to which authors, editors, publishers and others may apply for guidance to >provide opportunities for those interested in and connected with indexing >to meet and exchange information, ideas and experience relating to all >aspects of indexing >to establish and maintain relationships between the Society and other >bodies with related interests to publish information in accord with the >foregoing objects > >Membership is open to persons and institutions engaged in indexing or >interested in promoting the objects of the Society. Membership includes >subscription to the Newsletter plus opportunity to subscribe to the >Indexer. The Newsletter can now be supplied via e-mail, ideal for overseas >members. Conditions apply. There are more than 200 members throughout >Australia, and some in New Zealand. State Branches have been formed in >Victoria, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory. South >Australia has started an interest group. > >======================= >Australian Internet Registry of Professional Editors (AIRPE) >WWW: >It gives this list of all editors' associations in Australia and links to >related organisations. > >Canberra Society of Editors >PO Box 3222 >Manuka ACT 2603 AUSTRALIA > >Society of Editors (NSW) >PO Box 254 >Broadway NSW 2007 AUSTRALIA > >Society of Editors (Qld) >PO Box 1524 >Toowong QLD 4066 AUSTRALIA > >Society of Editors (SA) >PO Box 2328 >Kent Town SA 5071 AUSTRALIA > >Society of Editors (Vic) >PO Box 176 >Carlton South VIC 3053 AUSTRALIA > >Society of Editors (Tas) >PO Box 32 > > > > Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "But a lifetime of happiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth."--George Bernard Shaw ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 17:44:11 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Re: Editing and writing organizations (3) >Part 3 > > >Purpose: To provide the means of developing and implementing programs of >benefit to professional editorial freelancers and the publishing industry, >and to support and advance the interests of both. > >Comments: It seems to be specifically geared to Tri-State residents. >Benefits include group meetings and social events, the Job Phone (most if >not all of the freelance listings are for locals only), availability of >group health insurance, educational courses, informational and promotional >booklets and other publications, and a bimonthly newsletter. > >======================= > >editcetera >Barbara Fuller >Coordinator >1600 Shattuck Avenue >Suite 224 >Berkeley CA 94709 USA >Phone: +1-510-849-1110 >WWW: > >Editors who live in the San Francisco Bay Area should know about editcetera >(yes, it begins with a lowercase e). Membership is open to established >freelance editors and proofreaders living in the Bay Area, who must pass a >test in order to join. Members receive job referrals. editcetera also >offers classes in various publishing topics, open to both members and >nonmembers. > >======================= >Freelance Editorial Association (FEA) >P.O. Box 380835 >Cambridge MA 02238-0835 USA >Phone: +1-617-643-8626 >WWW: > >Benefits: Fair Practice Committee (advice and advocacy in settling disputes >with clients); the Members' Network (member mentoring and information; a >telephone network); meetings, programs, and social events; and various >publications. > >======================= >International Association of Business Communicators (IABC) >Full-time world headquarters office: >One Hallidie Plaza >Suite 600 >San Francisco, CA 94102, USA >Phone: +1-415-433-3400 >Fax: +1-415-362-8762 >WWW: > >Excerpted from the web site: >In Canada, the IABC Canada Resource Service is available for IABC leaders >and media inquiries. Contact: >Deirdre Davey, President >D. Davey Communications >229 Snowdon Ave. >Toronto ON M4N 2B4 Canada >Phone: +1-416-440-1911 >Fax: +1-416-487-4809 >E-mail: <75262.722@compuserve.com> > >IABC, the International Association of Business Communicators, is the >leading resource for effective communication. We provide products, >services, activities and networking opportunities to help people and >organizations achieve excellence in public relations, employee >communication, marketing communication, public affairs and other forms of >communication. > >Our products and services include: >Communication World, an award-winning print magazine covering trends and >issues. An annual international conference at which participants can >network and learn from top communicators. Communication Bank, a >comprehensive information service that provides how-to handbooks, >customized information searches of electronic databases, IABC Research >Foundation materials and information on award-winning programs. An >accreditation program in which people can have their professionalism >recognized by becoming Accredited Business Communicators (ABCs). The Gold >Quill awards program, recognizing communication excellence. WorldBook (a >membership directory and association guidebook printed annually) and IABC >MemberLink, a searchable electronic member database. > >Chapters >These local organizations have been established by volunteer IABC members >in 119 cities in: Australia | Belgium | Canada | France | Hong Kong | >Ireland | Mexico | New Zealand | Philippines | South Africa | Spain | >United Kingdom | United States > >======================= >International Publishing Management Association (IPMA) >1205 W. College Avenue >Liberty Missouri, 64068-3733 USA >Phone: +1-816-781-1111 >Fax: +1-816-781-2790 >E-mail: >WWW: > >Excerpted from the web site: >Regular memberships are available to persons who are in-house corporate >publishing or distribution professionals for a parent organization. These >members are people who are employed at parent corporations such as >associations, colleges and universities, government, hospitals, insurance, >manufacturing, primary and secondary education institutions, religious >organizations, retail and wholesale trade, and utilities. Regular >memberships account for 85% of our membership base. Annual dues rate for >Regular memberships are $150 for the first person from an organization and >$125 for each additional person. > >Associate memberships are held by persons representing equipment >manufacturers, computer software suppliers, ink and toner suppliers, or >paper manufacturers and resellers. IPMA facilitates two-way communication >between in-house publishing and distribution professionals and suppliers to >share the latest technologies. Associate memberships account for 15% of our >membership base. Annual dues rate for Associate memberships are $300 for >the first person from an organization at the same location and $175 for >each additional person. > >Benefits: >1. Professional development, networking, and information. >2. Chapter meetings. >3. Attend the annual conference and exhibit. >4. Achieve professional certification through two programs -- Certified >Graphic Communications Manager (CGCM) and Certified Mail Manager (CMM). 5. >Be recognized for outstanding performance by in-house professionals through >its awards competitions, promoting competent leadership, management, >education, and technical skills. 6. The Association's monthly publication, >Perspectives. >7. The IPMA Bookstore -- receive discounts on books, studies, and videos on >management, financial, computer, personnel, and production issues. 8. >Conduct research on any in-house corporate publishing and distribution >topic. > >======================= >The National Association of Government Communicators (NAGC) >669 S Washington St. >Alexandria VA 22314 USA >Phone: +1-703-519-3902 >E-mail: >WWW: > >Excerpted from the web site: >NAGC strives to unite those engaged in creating and disseminating >information concerning government. NAGC promotes high standards of >individual professionalism and public service and recognizes those who >achieve it. NAGC develops a specific awareness: professional government >communicators are an integral part of the policy-making process. Members >include writers, graphic and video artists, editors, broadcasters, >photographers, public in-formation officers-anyone involved in any field >that has anything to do with disseminating information within and outside >government. > >Awards: Government Communicator of the Year Award/Distinguished Service >Award/Awards of Excellence/Blue Pencil Awards/Gold Screen Awards NAGC >sponsors two annual national, highly regarded competitions to recognize >excellence in communications throughout government. The NAGC annual >communications school--earn continuing education credits presented through >open sessions and seminar workshops NAGC publishes a national magazine >bimonthly; a national listing of all its members; the NAGC Job Information >Letter, listing jobs in information open across the country,. Members all >across the country automatically become part of the national organization >based in Washington, D.C. They become members of a local chapter where one >is chartered. Local chapters sponsor meetings, workshops, and special >programs. The national board gives guidance and support as needed to local >chapters. > >DUES: Active, $85.00 Employed now (or unemployed and seeking a job) in >federal, state, county or local government. Affiliate, $125.00 >Non-government person engaged in communications or public relations whose >professional activities will enhance, further or support the objectives of >the NAGC. Retired, $45.00 >Student, $25.00 > >======================= >National Association of Professional Environmental Communicators (NAPEC) PO >Box 61-8352 >Chicago IL 60661-8352 USA >Phone: +1-312-661-1721 > >Nonprofit organization/forum for professional environmental communicators, >networking, chapter meetings, mentoring program, quarterly publication and >a newsletter. > >======================= >National Association of Real Estate Editors (NAREE) >1003 N.W. 6th Terrace >Boca Raton, FL 33486 USA >Fax: +1-407-391-0099 >E-Mail: >WWW: > >Excerpted from the web site: >The National Association of Real Estate Editors (NAREE) is the only >professional organization for real estate journalists -- writers, editors, >and columnists -- from print, electronic and broadcast media, as well as >communications professionals that represent firms or organizations in the >real estate industry. The organization meets three times a year, generally >at the National Association of Home Builder' convention at the beginning of >each year, its own professional development seminar in the spring or fall >of each year, and at the National Association of Realtors convention in the >fall. Active Membership: is restricted primarily to working journalists. >Active members must have as their principal occupation the reporting, >transmitting or editing of information about real estate and/or housing for >an independently owned publication, radio/television stations or electronic >media company. There is no initiation fee and annual membership dues for >Active Members is $75.00 and includes free copies of all NAREE publications >and membership services. Associate Membership: is restricted to real estate >communications professionals, primarily public relations professionals who >specialize in real estate. Associate members must be engaged in writing, >editing or broadcasting real estate news or editorial matter and do not >qualify for Active Membership. Associate Membership includes those writing >for or representing firms or organizations disseminating reports for a >limited or specialized audience. There is no initiation fee and annual >membership dues for Active Members is $110 and includes free copies of all >NAREE publications and membership services. > >Benefits: >NAREE Sourcebook, which lists hundreds of contact sources for real estate >journalists NAREE also publishes a free newsletter ten times a year for >members, NAREE NEWS Membership Directory: including full names, >affiliations, addresses, most direct phone numbers and many fax numbers. >Annual Awards Competition: >NAREE Active Members and other journalists compete for top writing prizes, >including cash awards and plaques. > >======================= >Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) >33 Irving Place >New York, NY 10003-2376 USA >Phone: +1-212-995-2230 > > > > > Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "But a lifetime of happiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth."--George Bernard Shaw ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 18:39:45 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Julie Forrest Subject: Re: Index entry software under development >If you (and other users) would take the time to tell me what you are >re-typing, I would greatly appreciate the information so that we can improve >documentation, etc. as needed. To keep this from boring the other members of >the Index-L, perhaps we should take the discussion off-line, in which case, >I'll be glad to report back to anyone who is interested. > >Gale Rhoades >Director >Macrex Sales & Support Office (North America only) Gale, Please do not take the discussion off-list as it is far from boring. Julie ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 23:17:41 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: The Ideal Index? NOT (a summary) In a message dated 96-09-06 12:10:40 EDT, Pilar wrote: > Just as there is an ideal logos, or the ideal circle, sure, there is an ideal > index. Pilar, Is this something along the lines of, in the beginning was the word (logos) and the word was indexed? ;-D (Sorry, couldn't resist...) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 22:33:02 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lawrenc846@AOL.COM Subject: Re: sample index Helen, This might be one way of approaching your problem. Find a subject you're interested in. Look for several magazine article on it. Check the references for older book length works. Check the older cited works for indexes. Do an index for one that lacks it. The value of following these steps is that you will have picked something that is still used. Hence you can argue the importance of the index for a valued but older work. Larry Feldman Lawrenc846@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 03:06:26 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: KINGH@SNYSYRV1.BITNET Subject: PC: terms vs. concepts I want to be careful about answering Hazel's question about how I handled constraints about use of certain terms in the last index I did so that I can preserve the confidentiality of the author. I'll need to stay general. An example for one sensitive area was to use relationships in general rather than particular kinds of relationships. Another one was to completely restructure my approach -- again moving to a more general heading and broader subheadings. Yes, I guess that's the way I delt with every instance -- moving from the particular to the general, the specific to the generic. The constraints may have improved the index in some ways (shorter, tighter) while making precision a bit more difficult. HMKing (kingh@vax.cs.hscsyr.edu) ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 22:50:43 UT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Joanne Clendenen Subject: Re: Editing tips? Hi, HM King; Your post intrigued me, because, even in the single year that I've been indexing, I've run into this problem because of the psychology books I've done. You wrote: <> Sometimes it does seem as if almost every entry should have a cross ref to something else, but I try to be careful not to over do. I mark my text in very great detail, without hardly any notes or structural comments (like listing proposed entries and subs in the margin). I make decisions on structure as I enter the terms, but I don't worry too much about shades of meaning at this point. If the author uses "affect" ( a term meaning the outward expression of emotion), I put the entry under "affect" in the beginning; if the author uses "emotion", I put it under emotion. Once I'm done with the book, and have hopefully consulted the author about shades of meaning that I should be aware of (I need to answer the question: "Are these two terms really synonyms, or not?"), I start grouping entries with closely related or actually synonymous terms in them. My indexing program, CINDEX, allows me to find entries with certain words and put them on a screen by themselves, so I can print them as a group and see how they relate to each other. Since affect and emotion are not entirely synonymous in the psych world, I left them as separate entries, with a See also from one to the other. I don't think one should force synonymity when the author intends there to be a small but significant difference in meaning. Now, when I grouped "intervention" and "move" (the author's new word for a counseling intervention), I considered these synonymous, and put all subentries under "move", with a See reference from "intervention". If these two did not have more than about 4 subentries, I probably would have double-posted, assuming space would allow. The main way that I keep everything straight is to make a note of synonomous or closely related terms as I go along, and make sure to group them at some point in the first edit, so I can see them together and decide how best to handle them. When author input is unavailable, I have also used the dictionary to assess the synonymity of terms. The other thing I do in the second edit, is to check all the cross references and see if they are necessary for space reasons, or if double post would be better. My philosophy is to let the user get to the substantive info as soon as possible, without having to look in more than one place in the index. Hope this helps. Joanne Clendenen J_Clendenen@msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 23:17:50 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: need help!! on length In a message dated 96-09-06 12:01:41 EDT, you write: > Another HELP MEEEEE from Rachel. Sorry again. OK, I've a book on population > control (not the one mentioned on the list a couple of weeks ago) and I've > been given 6 pgs for the index on a 300 pg book with 2-5 entries per page. > According to Lori L's index estimator, and to my own calculations based on > what I've got so far, I'm going to exceed 6 pgs by a fair amt. I can't > decide which important stuff to leave out. There are references to varying > countrys' fertilitiy rates, food and fuel consumptions, etc. I thought of > leaving refs to individual countries out and trying to lump them together > somehow, but I think this is info the reader will want to reference. I also > am trying to keep down double posting, and leaving out as many excess words > and stuff as possible. Rachel, Aiiiish! I've had to shoehorn indexes to 800-pp, highly technical, books into 10 pages, so I hear you. You're on the right track with keeping down double-posting and being as pithy as possible. Other space-eaters are going down to subsubentry levels, which I avoid as much as I can, and long acronym spellouts. With long acronym spellouts that roll over, I break the usual rules and put a See reference from the acronym (without the spellout following it in parens) to the spellout without the acronym itself following it in parens. (To maintain consistency, however, if you do it for one culprit, you should do it for the others as well, IMHO.) Sometimes that prevents the rollover. You may also want to ask your client if you can squash the ending number in page ranges if their style doesn't usually allow that. Even with intensely editing subentries to sometimes almost inscrutable brevity, you can end up with rollover lines that consist of nothing but a page number, especially when you go to three columns across. This leads to another tactic of desperation (done with the publisher's permission), going to three columns across at 7-pt type. (Rollovers increase dramatically at three columns, but it does save some space.) It's best, when you do that, to actually get the publisher's text area dimensions, then set up a macro in your word processor to format the index according to those margins from an .RTF file generated by your indexing software. For the publisher who often doesn't give me enough space to deliver a decent index in, I have a WinWord macro especially for their image-area dimensions that will tell me within seconds where I am in terms of the space allotted. Because this is so easy to do, I generate an .RTF file and format it often in the indexing and editing processes to see how I'm doing spacewise. I've found it best to index the text fairly closely to what the text demands, then do a hideous slash-and-burn in the editing. It's far more difficult to cut an index that doesn't have much structure, due to extremely light indexing, that to cut and heavily cross reference, IMHO. (Otherwise you'll end up with the nightmare of having concepts you should have indexed in some way, but skipped in trying to index lightly, then having to try to give a passing nod to them somewhere in the middle of the book.) > > The sample I was sent has strings and strings of undifferentiated locators. > Another way to save space, but makes for a fairly useless index. I agree. When I'm faced with severe space restrictions, I've had to go up to 5 undifferentiated locators, hating it all the while. Even so, I've had to index mainly the headings (and permutations of them) with light dips into the text passages when working with ridiculous space limitations. There is just no way you can create a very good index, IMHO, when space is severely limited. > >I was supposed to have til Wed., and so did my other > index first, then came Edouard who put me out of business for 2 days, and > then I was asked to get it in early by 2 days. Hope I can do it. Doesn't this seem to always be the case when you have a problem index? Good luck!! I'd pack up the TECHindexMobile (complete with flashing lights and sirens) and deploy my Indexing Emergency Response Team (family) to help you out if I could. But Edouard wiped out the indexer-in-crisis blip on our situation room radar until now. ;-D > > PS anyone got a good remedy for poison ivy? How in the heck did you get poison ivy with a hurricane going on?!! Were you outside having a Hurricane Party or something? ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 22:40:26 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: KINGH@SNYSYRV1.BITNET Subject: Re: The Ideal Index Can we use the criteria of precision and recall to rate an index from 0 can't find anything using it to 10 the ideal. I can find all the important relevant information using the index and I don't get sent to "noise." Now, the whole problem with precision is that what is relevant to me today may be irrelevant to me tomorrow and what may be relevant to me may not be relevant to you. But what if the author is the judge: if she rates the index as sending the reader to the information she INTENDED to be stressed or emphasized without a lot of effort and detours, then the index is ideal because it locates the information that was INTENDED by the creator to be important. Of course, in cases where the author is long dead, this evaluation method would be ineffective. ;-> HMKing kingh@vax.cs.hscsyr.edu ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 07:18:14 -0700 Reply-To: Kari Bero Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kari Bero Subject: un-numbered locators I'm indexing a book about an organization's official document. The full text of the document appears in the beginning of the book, _before page numbering begins_. The document faces page 1, but has no number. Yes, folks, there aren't even roman numerals on these pages of front matter. Whatever shall I do? I'll contact the editor with some options and ask if he has any preferences, but I want to make sure I've got at least one good option first. ;-) I could choose to not include a reference to it in the index, and hope readers will find it on their own. (ick) Or, I could use page 1 as the locator, and hope readers look on the facing page & see it. (ick) Or, I could add a note as the locator: XXX ... text of, facing 1 This seems to be the best option, but if I did this, I would need the locator to be clear and concise. Have any of you had this problem before? How did you deal with it? How _would_ you have dealt with it? Thanks in advance for your creativity, -Kari -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Kari J. Bero Bero-West Indexing Services 206-937-3673 3722 Beach Drive SW, Suite 101 bero@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu Seattle, WA 98116 http://alexia.lis.uiuc.edu/~bero/ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 13:49:05 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Per-entry rates In a message dated 96-09-06 20:39:45 EDT, you write: > Several of you have posted per-entry rates. Can you tell us what you count > as an entry? Does the following count as 1, 2, 4, or 8 entries? > > high culture > vs. popular culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 > popular culture > vs. high culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 > > Thanks a bunch. Cheers, > Haven't seen a lot of responses to this question, but I'd like to know how others charge. I was charging each string as one entry, giving me a total of 2 entries here. Then I did a job for someone who said charge for each page number separately, so this would be 8 entries. Now I don't know which is right or if there is a standard. Others? How do most folks do it? Is there a standard definition of "per entry", a commonly held understanding of what that means. Or does it have to be questioned and clarified each time or with each new client? Looking forward to more on this ... Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 12:20:38 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Larry Harrison Subject: Rate discussions My, where this thread has meandered! That's one thing I like about the net, and this listserv in particular: plant a tiny seed, and look at the tree! It's been fascinating -- thanks. Regards, Larry Harrison (larryh@millcomm.com) Freelance book indexing* Rochester, Minnesota *What's book indexing? ---> ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 08:34:33 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Re: The Ideal Index At 18:36 5/09/96 UT, you wrote: >We took several >Wilson Award winning indexes from the past, and analyzed and judged them >ourselves. > A few years ago (in The Indexer?) I read a comparison of the use of 'little words' (such as conjunctions) in subdivisions in award winning indexes and those to other books on similar subjects. The authors found that award-winning indexers use many less little words than other indexers. Since then I have omitted 'little words' where I think I can do without them. It funny though, as in the last few weeks Jon and I have each been checking indexes for the other, and the most common suggestion we have made is to add these 'little words' back in. So, as index readers, it seems that these words, even the almost meaningless 'and', make the index clearer to us. Glenda. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne, Blaxland NSW Australia E-mail - jonathan@magna.com.au Web - http://www.magna.com.au/~jonathan ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Jermey's Law: Information content is proportional to the inverse square of bandwidth. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 17:42:23 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Re: Editing and writing organizations (2) >Part 2 > > >AMWA Headquarters: >American Medical Writers Association >9650 Rockville Pike >Bethesda MD 20814-3998 USA >Phone: +1-301-493-0003 >Fax: +1-301-493-6384 >E-mail: >WWW: > >Lillian Sablack, Executive Director >Sharron Endriss, Membership > >Annual Conference: >1996, Nov 6-9, Chicago Marriott >1997, Nov 12-15, Sheraton Boston >1998, Oct. 27-30, Vancouver Hyatt > >>From AMWA's mission blurb: "a nonprofit, professional society dedicated to >promoting excellence in biomedical communication...brings together >communicators and educators engaged in the medical or allied professions >and sciences throughout the world" > >>From my own perspective as a member for nearly a decade: >The best things about AMWA are the wonderfully warm colleagues and >contacts; the peer-reviewed, fairly meaty *AMWA Journal* and related >publications; and the superb national conference each fall (e.g., in >Baltimore, 1995; Chicago, 1996; Boston, 1997; Vancouver, 1998). > >AMWA comprises several subgroups: people who write patient education >materials; people who work for pharmaceutical companies; people who work >for large groups of health care providers (e.g., Cleveland Clinic). There >are people who write materials for the lay public and those who write items >aimed at primary care physicians, people who spend their time composing FDA >drug applications, people who edit journals or the articles submitted to >them. The "primary interests" are coded as writing, editing, audiovisual, >pharmaceutical, teaching, freelance writing, administration, freelance >editing, public relations, translating, research, advertising, and >marketing. > >======================= >American Society of Indexers (ASI) >ASI Membership >PO Box 48267 >Seattle WA 98148-0267 USA >WWW: > >Excerpted from the web site: >Membership in ASI is open to all interested persons: professional indexers, >editors, publishers, librarians, and anyone else who's curious about >indexing. DUES: Regular $65.00 ; Student $35.00 (must send verification of >full-time status) ; Corporate $150.00 Membership includes: >Listing in the ASI Membership directory >Optional listing in the Indexer Locator allows publishers to find you. >Subscription to Keywords: The newsletter of the American Society of >Indexers Subscription to The Indexer: Journal of the Society of Indexers >Reduced rates for advertisements in Keywords, ASI publications, ASI >conferences and workshops > >======================= >American Society of Newspaper Editors (ASNE) >Executive Director >Lee Stinnett >11690B Sunrise Valley Drive >Reston VA. 20191 USA >Phone: +1-703-453-1122 >The executive >E-mail: > >======================= >Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC) >University of South Carolina >1621 College Street >Columbia, SC 29208-0251 USA >WWW: > >This began as an association of journalism teachers, but now includes >teachers in all phases (PR, advertising, broadcasting, history, theory, >law, etc.) of mass comm. Many of its members are journalism teachers, many >of whom teach copy editing. Many members are occasional or former >journalists, and many of these are copy editors. AEJMC has around 2,000 >members. Most members are from the USA, many are from Canada, a few are >from other countries. As an AEJMC member and occasional and former >journalist, I found CE-L highly useful. Some CE-Lmates may find AEJMC >useful. > >======================= >Association of Teachers of Technical Writing (ATTW) >Billie J. Wahlstrom, ATTW >Department of Rhetoric >201 Haecker Hall >1364 Eckles Avenue >University of Minnesota >St. Paul MN 55108-6122 USA >WWW: > >Excerpted from the web site: >Membership in ATTW is from January 1 to December 31 and includes >subscriptions to the ATTW bulletin and Technical Communication Quarterly. >Annual dues are $30 for individuals inside the U.S. >$35 for individuals outside the U.S. >$50 for libraries, institutions, or companies >$15 for students (certification required) >Lifetime memberships are also available at a considerable savings. > >The Association of Teachers of Technical Writing was established in 1973 to >encourage dialogue among teachers of technical communication and to develop >technical communication as a discipline. Its international membership >includes over 1000 teachers and professional communicators. ATTW offers >course syllabi as well as information on academic programs in technical >communication and additional resources such as pertinent World Wide Web >sites, e-mail discussion lists, and MOOs. ATTW distributes news of the >association and the profession, including notices of awards, conventions, >job vacancies, and calls for papers. ATTW publishes Technical Communication >Quarterly as well as the semi-annual ATTW bulletin and a series of books on >the teaching of technical communication. Join the e-mail discussion list, >ATTW-L > >======================= >Bay Area Editors' Forum (BAEF) >Julie Powell >3145 Geary Boulevard #222 >San Francisco CA 94118 USA >Phone: +1-415-979-3035 > >Purpose: BAEF is an association of staff and freelance editors from a >variety of publishing and publications settings. Through a series of >evening programs, we provide opportunities for social and business >contacts, mutual support, and professional development. Informally, we >serve as a clearinghouse for freelance and staff employment opportunities. >Membership ($30) is open to anyone with an active interest in editing - >useful mainly for those close enough to San Francisco to come in for an >evening meeting; dues go for refreshments at meetings and for an annual >directory that is distributed to organizations that hire editors. > >======================= >Board of Editors in the Life Sciences, Inc. (BELS) >PO Box 824 >Highlands NC 28741-0824 USA >WWW: > >Several subscribers to COPYEDITING-L have asked about editing tests. Many >publishing companies and other organizations administer their own tests to >prospective editorial employees. However, editors who are interested in an >editing credential might want to know about the program of the Board of >Editors in the Life Sciences (BELS). > >BELS was incorporated in 1991 and now has about 128 members in the United >States, Canada, England, Scotland, Germany, Austria, Hungary, and Finland. > >To quote from the introductory BELS brochure: "Potential employers and >clients of manuscript editors usually have no objective way to assess the >proficiency of the editors. For their part, editors are frustrated by the >difficulty of demonstrating their ability. That is why both employers and >editors so often resort to personal references or ad hoc tests, not always >with satisfactory results. The need for an objective test of editorial >skill has long been recognized." > >BELS has developed two editorial credentials. To evaluate proficiency in >editing in the life sciences according to internationally recognized >standards, it administers two examinations--for certification and for >diplomate status--that focus on the principles and practices of scientific >editing in English. > >To be eligible for the certification examination, an editor must have a >bachelor's degree, or equivalent, from an accredited academic institution >and at least 2 years of experience as a manuscript editor in the life >sciences. The examination is given several times a year, often in places >and at times that coincide with national and international meetings of >professional organizations that editors are likely to belong to, such as >the Council of Biology Editors, the American Medical Writers Association, >the Society for Scholarly Publishing, and the European Association of >Science Editors. Fees for taking the 3-hour, multiple-choice certification >examination total $125 (US)--a nonrefundable application fee of $25 plus a >registration fee of $100. > >To be eligible for diplomate status, a candidate must be a board-certified >editor with at least 6 years of experience. The diplomate procedure >includes submission and review of a portfolio, which consists of edited >material and short original essays on topics pertinent to scientific >editing, and a written and oral examination. Fees for portfolio review and >the diplomate examination total $200. > >======================= >Chicago Women in Publishing (CWIP) >200 North Washington, Suite 201 >Naperville IL 60540 USA >Phone: +1-312-641-6311 >Fax: +1-708-416-3860 >WWW: > >Mission Statement: The mission of Chicago Women in Publishing is to provide >a forum for recognizing and promoting the advancement of women in all >fields of the publishing industry. We dedicate ourselves to promoting a >dynamic referral and support network for Chicagoland publishing >professionals. Our aim is to be Chicago's most respected source of >publishing education, information, outreach, leadership, and career >opportunities. > >Comments: CWIP is also open to men and people living outside the Chicago >area. Benefits to those who live at a distance are obviously limited >compared to the full benefits that Chicagoans enjoy, but include access to >group health insurance, the Jobvine (CWIP's job line), a subscription to >*Clips,* CWIP's informative newsletter, and reduced prices on selected >editing-related books recommended by members. > >======================= >Council of Biology Editors (CBE) >60 Revere Drive, Suite 500 >Northbrook IL 60062 USA >Phone: +1-847-480-6349 >Fax: +1-847-480-9282 >E-mail: >WWW: > >======================= >Editorial Freelancers Association, Inc. (EFA) >71 West 23rd Street >Suite 1504 >New York NY 10010 USA >Phone: +1-212-929-5400 >Fax: +1-212-929-5439 >WWW: > > > > > Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "But a lifetime of happiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth."--George Bernard Shaw ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 17:47:14 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Re: Editing and writing organizations (5) >From: md2013@mail.eclipse.co.uk >Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 20:53:04 +0000 >To: hazel blumberg-mckee >Subject: Re: Editing and writing organizations (5) > >Part 5 > >Sandy Bay TAS 7005 AUSTRALIA > >Society of Editors (WA) >PO Box 277 >South Fremantle WA 6162 AUSTRALIA >WWW: > >======================= >African Association of Science Editors >PO Box 3041 >Harare >Zimbabwe > >======================= >Ghana Association of Book Editors >PO Box K601 >Accra New Town >Ghana > >======================= >Professional Editors' Group (PEG) >PO Box 85410 >Emmarentia 2029 >South Africa > >======================= >Israel Association of Periodical Press >93 Arlozorov Street >Tel Aviv 62098 Israel >Phone: +972-3-6921238 >Fax: +972-3-6960155 > >Affiliated with the FIPP (International Federation of the Periodical Press) >======================= > >The British Association of Communicators in Business Limited (BACB) >(formerly British Association of Industrial Editors) >Membership Secretary >Mrs Janet Field >3 Locks Yard >High Street >Sevenoaks, Kent TN13 1LT UK >Phone +44-(0)1732-459331 >Fax: +44-(0)1732-461757 >E-mail: >WWW: > >>From the brochure: The Association aims to be the market leader for those >involved in corporate media management and practice by providing >professional, authoritative, dynamic, supportive and innovative services. >We represent professionals in all communications disciplines from editing, >journalism, graphics, video production and photography to strategic >communications and employee relations. > >Benefits: active support network; structured education and professional >development programme leading to recognised qualifications; events; annual >awards competition recognises the best in corporate communications; >conferences, seminars, workshops; *Crucible* newsletter and *Communicators >in Business* magazine; membership directory, legal helpline, discounts for >services, etc. > >======================= >European Association of Science Editors (EASE) >Ms Maeve O'Connor >Secretary-Treasurer >49 Rossendalel Way >London NW1 0XB UK >Telephone: +44-(0)171-388-9668 >Fax: +44-(0)171-383-3092 >E-mail: >WWW: > >Purpose >1. To promote improved communication in science by providing efficient >means for cooperation among editors of publications in the sciences. 2. To >assist the efficient operation of publication in the sciences. > >======================= >International Federation of Science Editors (IFSE) >Consorzio Mario Negri Sud, 66030, S. Maria >Imbaro, Italy > >======================= >Society of Freelance Editors and Proofreaders (SFEP) >Membership Secretary >Sally Vince >15 Lansdown View >Faulkland >Bath BA3 5UT UK >Phone +44-(0)1373-834677 >Fax: +44-(0)1373-834777 >E-mail: >WWW: > >Partial list of aims: To encourage high standards of editing and >proofreading, and with that objective to establish and maintain or assist >in establishing and maintaining training courses and meetings either >independently of or in connection with any college, university or other >relevant body, leading where appropriate to accreditation or registration >by the Society or to other recognized qualifications. To uphold the >professional status of editors and proofreaders; to promote honourable >practice; to discourage malpractice; to debate and clarify disputed points >of practice and questions of professional usage or courtesy. > >======================= >Society of English-Native Speaking Editors (SENSE) >Boesliaan 3 >6703 EN Wageningen >Netherlands > >======================= >Society of Indexers >Attn Mrs Clare Troughton, Secretary >c/o 38 Rochester Road >London NW1 9JJ UK >Phone: +44-(0)171-916-7809 > >======================= >Society of Young Publishers >c/o 12 Dyott Street >London WC1A 1DF >Networking, seminars, newsletters. Associate membership available for "old" >publishers. > >======================= >Women in Publishing (WiP) >Jane Middleton >Membership Secretary >29 Ravensbury Road >London SW18 4SA UK >phone +44-(0)181-946-1961 >OR >WiP Information Officer >28 Poulett Gardens >Twickenham, Middlesex TW1 4OR UK > >Founded in 1979 to promote the status of women working in publishing and >related trades. Our aims include providing opportunities for sharing >information and expertise, encouraging networking and mutual support, and >offering practical training for career and personal development. Our >activities--organised and administered by small committees of >volunteers--are open to all women interested in publishing, and WiP's >members in the UK and abroad range from students to managing directors. > >======================= >A big thank you to the many who contributed: >Madeline Koch, Fran Aitkens, Hilary Powers, Joan Pendleton, Matthew >Stevens, Karyn Popham, Mary Knatterud, Yateendra Joshi, Elaine Firestone, >Norm Grossblatt, Amy J. Schneider, Claudette Upton, Dan A. Wilson, Amy >Carroll, Louisa Dennis, Simon Cauchi, Laurel Busch, Kat Nagel, Chad Skaggs, >Bill Connolly, AM Goldstein, Rebecca Pepper, and Thomas Farrell >======================= > >END > > > > Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "But a lifetime of happiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth."--George Bernard Shaw ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 8 Sep 1996 08:34:24 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Thinking. (Was: my two cents (rates, etc.)) At 10:14 5/09/96 -0700, you wrote: >But then, sometimes I just spend too much time thinking... This comment prompts my note about something I have been considering when thinking about hourly rates,etc. Jon and I both index, and Jon usually charges about Aust$3.50 per page while I charge Aust$4.30 per page (with a lot of variety up or down depending on the specific book). There are two reasons for this: I do more detailed indexes (which take more time) and I also index more slowly. The reason I index more slowly is that I *think* about the material I index, while Jon pulls out the crucial descriptors but doesn't look any further into the subject material than he has to. I saw this concept well-described by an indexer who spoke to a meeting of Editors in Sydney. She says that she doesn't have time to read for understanding, but that she always reads for meaning. I also relate to a description I once read about librarians, which said they were such inveterate readers that they will read anything in front of them, including the sides of cereal boxes etc. In a book I recently indexed I read all the exercises for students at the end of each chapter. I *knew* I wouldn't give any index terms, and I *knew* that I would learn nothing useful from it, but my sense of completeness just wouldn't let me skim. To this extent I would call part of my indexing a hobby. I spend time doing things that are not crucial for the quality of the job, but are crucial to my job satisfaction. I would be interested to know how many of you are the stubborn readers, and how many are the real pros who can skim through a book picking out the important bits without wallowing in the content. And one last note on the psychology of indexers: My sister is doing an editing course, and was told that indexers are interesting people. 'Interesting' was said in a way which implied 'strange', and the teacher said that you could tell an indexer's perspective and obsessions from the terms they include in the index. An interesting observation, and one far removed from our own vision of ourselves (My personal response is that she might be reflecting her *own* problems...). Regards, Glenda. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne, Blaxland NSW Australia E-mail - jonathan@magna.com.au Web - http://www.magna.com.au/~jonathan ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Jermey's Law: Information content is proportional to the inverse square of bandwidth. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 17:40:21 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Re: Editing and writing organizations (1) Darlene Davidovic VERY generously and kindly sent me the listing of editing and writing organizations she put together. The listing is in five parts, so I'll send them all to index-l. Hope they're of help. Hazel >PART 1 > >List of professional associations for editors compiled July/96 Many of >these associations have international memberships. >Some have on-line membership application forms. >All mistakes are mine. Apologies in advance. >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >Editors' Association of Canada (EAC/ACR) >35 Spadina Road >Toronto, Ontario >M5R 2S9 CANADA >Phone: +1-416-975-1379 >Fax: +1-416-975-1839 >E-mail: >WWW: > >The branches are: >Quebec/Atlantic Canada >CP 696, Place du Parc >Montreal, Quebec H2W 2P3 >Phone: +1-514-522-2842 > >National Capital Region >PO Box 4787, Station E >Ottawa, Ontario >K1S 5H9 >Phone: +1-613-820-5731 > >Toronto >same as national office above > >Western Canada >P O Box 1688 >Bentall Centre Post Office >Vancouver BC V6C 2P7 >Phone: +1-614-681-7184 > >And our newest branch >Prairie Provinces >PO Box 12082 >Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3L2 >Phone: +1-403-477-1066 > >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >Indexing and Abstracting Society of Canada/Soci=E9t=E9 canadienne pour >l'analyse de documents PO Box 744, Station F >Toronto ON M4Y 2N6 CANADA >WWW: > >IASC publications: Bulletin (quarterly); Membership directory (annual); >Register of indexers available (annual) > >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >Professional Editors Association of Vancouver Island (PEAVI) >Contact Fran Aitkens >Phone/Fax Canada +1-604-598-3723 >E-mail: > >meets once a month in Victoria BC Canada for support, education, >professional development > >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >Association for Documentary Editing (ADE) >Sharon Ritenour Stevens >ADE Secretary >George C Marshall Foundation >PO Box 1600 >Lexington VA 24450 USA >Phone: +1-540-463-7103 >Fax: +1-540-464-5229 >WWW: >The Association for Documentary Editing (ADE) was created in 1979 to >promote documentary editing through the cooperation and exchange of ideas >among the community of editors. The ADE now has more than 450 members. We >welcome to our membership individuals and institutions who share our >interests. Members of the ADE are working on editions in history, >literature, philosophy, the arts, and the sciences. Many members are >full-time editors; others are teachers or archivists as well as editors; >and some are editors by avocation. Of the more than 150 editorial projects >represented in the ADE, some are long-term, multivolume editions; others >are single-volume or microform publications. > >The ADE plays a significant role in publishing, automating, setting >standards for documentary editions, and representing the interests of the >profession in Washington, D.C. The ADE has been very successful in lobbying >on behalf of documentary editors and the federal agencies that fund >documentary editions. Membership: Annual $25/yr + four other categories. > >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >Association of Earth Science Editors: (AESE) >Kate Lessing, >Secretary/Treasurer >781 Northwest Drive >Morgantown WV 26505 USA >Phone: +1-304-285-4679 >Fax: +1-304-285-4403/4469 >E-mail: > >Purpose (according to membership directory): To foster education and >improved communication in the earth sciences by providing efficient means >for cooperation among editors and promoting effective publishing of >publications such as (but not limited to) journals, reviews, monograph >series, abstract journals and services, indexes, microcards, and similar >media devoted to the continuing dissemination of knowledge in the earth >sciences. > >Other info: Has more than 300 members in US and Canada; benefits include an >annual meeting and the newsletter *Blueline* > >=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >American Medical Writers Association (AMWA) >international--one of the "local" chapters is "Europe" > > > > > > > > Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "But a lifetime of happiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth."--George Bernard Shaw =20 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 11:30:04 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: KINGH@SNYSYRV1.BITNET Subject: Re: CINDEX Help Requested In my version (previous to current), enclose all symbols, letters, numbers in <> if you don't want them sorted into a special grouping of symbols. The {} are used if you want to force a sort on the letter enclosed in them. HMK (kingh@vax.cs.hscsyr.edu) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 11:35:21 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: KINGH@SNYSYRV1.BITNET Subject: Re: Editing tips? Yes Joanne your message will help for next book. I've been lazy. I should have been pulling together those terms all along as you mentioned into groups. CINDEX does offer that help and I haven't been taking as much advantage of that help as I should. Thank. HMKing (kingh@vax.cs.hscsyr.edu) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 10:43:45 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Andre De Tienne Subject: Re: Per-entry rates > >Several of you have posted per-entry rates. Can you tell us what you count >as an entry? Does the following count as 1, 2, 4, or 8 entries? > >high culture > vs. popular culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 >popular culture > vs. high culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 > Carol, There is hardly any question for me that you've got 8 entries here. Each of them required attention, analysis, recognition, comparison, search, phrasing, reconsideration, hesitation, pondering, evaluation, in short, exercise of your professional competence. The fact that main and subentries can be swapped by a fast button click in your favorite software doesn't change this: it is still a matter of your own professional judgment whether a given entry is worth flipping, and that in itself makes every locator worth its weight of gold. By the same token, a string of locators is a string of entries which just happen to share the same heading(s). If an editor has trouble with this, let that person decide which entry was created first, and which one was swapped, and pay more for the first, less or not at all for the second. But wouldn't that be absurd? All entries in an index, regardless of their mechanical creation, are equal. If editors are going to pay you per entry, they have to be consistent, and not start weighing the amount of time or effort each occurrence took you to create. Regards, Andre *************************************************************************** Andre De Tienne Tel.(W): 317-274-2033 Assistant Editor Tel.(H): 317-328-8789 Peirce Edition Project, IUPUI Fax: 317-274-2347 CA 545, 425 University Boulevard E-mail: adetienn@iupui.edu Indianapolis, IN 46202-5140 adetienn@indyvax.iupui.edu *************************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 10:49:23 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Andre De Tienne Subject: Re: un-numbered locators > >Whatever shall I do? I'll contact the editor with some options and ask >if he has any preferences, but I want to make sure I've got at least one >good option first. ;-) I could choose to not include a reference to it >in the index, and hope readers will find it on their own. (ick) Or, I >could use page 1 as the locator, and hope readers look on the facing page >& see it. (ick) Or, I could add a note as the locator: > XXX > ... > text of, facing 1 >This seems to be the best option, but if I did this, I would need the >locator to be clear and concise. > >Have any of you had this problem before? How did you deal with it? How >_would_ you have dealt with it? > >Thanks in advance for your creativity, > -Kari You might simply have the locator of each entry belonging to that unnumbered page be preceded by the abbreviation "opp." for "opposite." Thus: Company statement, opp. 1 Andre *************************************************************************** Andre De Tienne Tel.(W): 317-274-2033 Assistant Editor Tel.(H): 317-328-8789 Peirce Edition Project, IUPUI Fax: 317-274-2347 CA 545, 425 University Boulevard E-mail: adetienn@iupui.edu Indianapolis, IN 46202-5140 adetienn@indyvax.iupui.edu *************************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 10:58:51 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was maryann@REVISOR.LEG.STATE.MN.US From: Maryann Corbett Organization: Revisor of Statutes Subject: Re: The Ideal Index KINGH@SNYSYRV1.BITNET wrote: But what if the author is the judge: if she > rates the index as sending the reader to the information she INTENDED > to be stressed or emphasized ... I'm recalling a time when I was both author and indexer of a text (a legislative drafting manual). I neglected to make entries to certain things that were side issues in the paragraphs where they appeared. Later, when people asked me where on earth those issues were discussed in the manual, I couldn't tell them. My author's emphasis had been a poor guide to my indexing. I'd say that as often as not, it's important for the indexer NOT to pay attention to "emphasis" as the author assigns it, but to know well what the audience is likely to need to look up. Sometimes the audience is so broad that it's not possible to know such a thing, but when it is even remotely possible, I'd say it constitutes the ideal. -- Maryann Corbett Language Specialist Office of the Revisor of Statutes Minnesota Legislature 612-297-2952 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 08:59:09 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: Re: speed reading and psychology of indexers Glenda wrote: >I would be interested to know how many of you are the stubborn readers, and >how many are the real pros who can skim through a book picking out the >important bits without wallowing in the content. I confess to being unable to skim, and I'm not a speed reader either, which is one reason it always takes me longer than I feel it should to index complex material. That's the stuff I call "mind-frying." Yet oddly enough, I find this type of work the most satisfying. When I have to index medical texts or computer manuals, I can work faster, but the boredom level is much higher. Must be the pathological reading gene! Glenda also wrote: >And one last note on the psychology of indexers: My sister is doing an >editing course, and was told that indexers are interesting people. >'Interesting' was said in a way which implied 'strange', and the teacher >said that you could tell an indexer's perspective and obsessions from the >terms they include in the index. An interesting observation, and one far >removed from our own vision of ourselves (My personal response is that she >might be reflecting her *own* problems...). any author will write from his or own perspective, and since indexes are creative products, they will of course reflect our personalities in some way, but we are also passionately devoted to adequately reflecting the text we are indexing, and ideally (hoo hah) our indexes would complement the structure, language, and viewpoint of the books. I agree with Glenda's response to this teacher's observation! Elinor Lindheimer elinorl@mcn.org ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 09:05:06 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Pam Rider Subject: Re: suggestion At 09:22 AM 9/7/96 -0400, Linda wrote: >Over at Copyediting-L, the CEL-mates have a system for naming your subject >when posting to the list. Copyediting-L began much as what we now how with Index-L. It has degenerated into a massive list of language misinformation, psychotherapy, politics, lookey-loos and wanna-bes. This continues as a professional list, and I see no reason for mucking it up with more complications. Pam Rider Trying to walk cheerfully on the Earth prider@powergrid.electriciti.com prider@tsktsk.com http://www.electriciti.com:80/~prider/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 09:06:11 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Pam Rider Subject: Re: Per-entry rate >In a message dated 96-09-06 20:39:45 EDT, Janet wrote:: > > >> high culture >> vs. popular culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 >> popular culture >> vs. high culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 >> I was charging each string as one entry, giving me a total of >2 entries here. Then I did a job for someone who said charge for each page >number separately, so this would be 8 entries. Now I don't know which is >right or if there is a standard. > I have always charged as you originally have. I welcome an increase, but will not try it out on longtime customers accustomed to the original accounting. With them, I negotiate per-entry rates on each string as an entry. I am not convinced there is a right or wrong. Pam Rider Trying to walk cheerfully on the Earth prider@powergrid.electriciti.com prider@tsktsk.com http://www.electriciti.com:80/~prider/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 12:12:54 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: KINGH@SNYSYRV1.BITNET Subject: Re: Editing tips? Lynn, I feel I can't give examples from last book as I've made some other comments on the list about it and so want to make sure I keep project confidential. I'm going to be looking over the pre-final draft ms for the next text today and I'll pick a few terms I know I'm going to have difficulty with to post as examples. Thesaurus -- maybe but many times the problem is the particular spin the author is giving to these terms. Defining them in the text ... makes it hard to trust an outside source. Author was somewhat helpful in clarifying but not enough to make a succinct index. Thanks, you always post excellent messages. HMKing (kingh@vax.cs.hscsyr.edu) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 12:13:25 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: The Ideal Index? NOT (a summary) In a message dated 96-09-09 11:43:50 EDT, Lynn wrote: << Is this something along the lines of, in the beginning was the word (logos) and the word was indexed? ;-D >> In fact, Yup! [I don't think we need to get into a discussion of ancient greek, but if anyone is interested, I've got a lexicon from college just a few feet away ...] L. Pilar Wyman (Pilar) Wyman Indexing Annapolis, MD Tel/Fax: 410-263-7537 Email: PilarW@aol.com "What is indexing?" -----> http://www.well.com/user/asi/indfaq.htm ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 12:13:45 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Thinking. (Was: my two cents (rates, etc.)) In a message dated 96-09-09 11:44:00 EDT, Glenda wrote: << Jon and I both index, and Jon usually charges about Aust$3.50 per page while I charge Aust$4.30 per page >> Glenda, For us internationally-illiterate amuricans, would you mind reminding us what the Australian-U.S. $ conversion rate is? I'm curious as to how these rates related to U.S. rates. Thanks. BTW, as to reading those student tests in the books we index, I justify that as helpful for determining how to phrase my entries, in anticipation of how students may use the index... ;-) from one weirdo to another?!, Pilar Wyman Indexing Annapolis, MD Tel/Fax: 410-263-7537 Email: PilarW@aol.com "What is indexing?" -----> http://www.well.com/user/asi/indfaq.htm ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 12:16:04 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Mrowland@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Per-entry rates In a message dated 96-09-09 11:44:32 EDT, you write: << Several of you have posted per-entry rates. Can you tell us what you count > as an entry? Does the following count as 1, 2, 4, or 8 entries? > > high culture > vs. popular culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 > popular culture > vs. high culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 > >> I charge for 8 entries at $.65 for one publisher (their standard rate). Each locator is an entry. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 09:41:44 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: Re: Per-entry rates >> Several of you have posted per-entry rates. Can you tell us what you count >> as an entry? Does the following count as 1, 2, 4, or 8 entries? >> >> high culture >> vs. popular culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 >> popular culture >> vs. high culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 >> I have been following the practice of a colleague in quoting per-entry rates. The count is made from a word-processing index at 55 or 60 characters per line (sometimes I do shorter lines--depends on the material) with turnovers. Each printed line counts as an entry. Thus, the above would be four entries. Since I always deliver an index without turnover lines, I do the count in XyWrite by changing the margins, then with a keystroke or two put it back with no turnovers. The per-entry rate figured this way seems fair to me, and matches what I would want to be the per-page rate on a given book. I found if I counted each page locator (8 in the example above), the price would be prohibitive for the client. Counting the heading without a page locator, or counting the turnover lines, makes up for the strings of locators being counted as one entry. This counting method also seems to compare adequately with the Macrex MBK file length, merged, of course. I'm sure the results would be similar with Cindex. Clients too are satisfied. Elinor Lindheimer elinorl@mcn.org ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 09:54:10 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: Re: un-numbered locators Kari Bero wrote: >I'm indexing a book about an organization's official document. The full >text of the document appears in the beginning of the book, _before page >numbering begins_. The document faces page 1, but has no number. Yes, >folks, there aren't even roman numerals on these pages of front matter. > If the book is about the document, I wouldn't put a reference to the full document itself in the index--solves the problem by ignoring it! I've indexed cookbooks where a recipe illustration appears on an unnumbered page, and I've used [italicized] ^inside front cover^ or some such phrase as appropriate. Elinor Lindheimer elinorl@mcn.org ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:17:42 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: un-numbered locators Kari, Another suggestion: if the document could be considered a frontespiece, I would use this word as the page locator. I had to do this earlier this year. The book was one published by a museum about Fred Harvey and railroading. There were many photos of old Santa Fe trains, and corresponding discussion of the history of each train in the text. This one photo of a certain 1800's train was the frontespiece of the book, and I hated to let the reference to its photo go un-indexed. I think I posted the question on the AOL Indexer's Folder, and that was the suggested solution. The client left it in the index as is, thank goodness. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:17:52 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Per-entry rates As you can see from the two postings so far, there is general disagreement on this subject. Pam said that in her experience, the example was charged as 2 strings, so therefore 2 entries. Marilyn and Andre said there were 8 page locators, so therefore 8 entries. Please -- I hope more of you post your opinion here. Inquiring minds really need to know how this is generally handled. Or is the conclusion to speak to clients and negotiate carefully? Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:18:04 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Editing tips? What an interesting topic! And it could lead to an interesting discussion of work methods/habits! ;-) Joanne, I work differently than you do (strictly FYI), and do a lot of deciding about terms as I mark pages. I prefer to get the hierarchy of terms I use, and a basic structure (always subject to change, of course) in mind first and work according to that (I guess I have a passion for orderliness, and don't like uncertainty for too long!). So I decide as I mark, and then do my data input that way. Not to say I don't change my mind later, but just another example of different strokes for different folks. Our minds all work differently (a la "indexing as a creative act"), and we bring this to our indexing work. A suggestion for you: Some people keep an off-computer list of questions, terms, problems to be resolved. I have no problem with that, but keep in mind that such a list could be incorporated into the computer file (index), by creating an entry that is a question or note to yourself, and giving it the main entry term that would put it in the correct place alphabetically where you would want it to be to trigger the question when the entries are right there with it. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:30:52 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: CHAT: Headings for postings I like the suggestion of using headers like CHAT, HUMOR, JOURN, and the like. Great idea! Except it'll probably take me far too much time to analyze what I'm gonna say and to find the appropriate header. ;} Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "But a lifetime of happiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth."--George Bernard Shaw ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:35:45 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Pmauer@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Indexing newspapers In a message dated 96-09-09 11:50:22 EDT, you write: << I'm interested in anyone's views/experiences on what the recommended indexing would be for electronic newspapers. >> I've wondered about this too. I also wonder who gets the job of writing the indexes and abstracts for all of the periodical articles. When I go to the library and use the electronic indexes on CD-ROM to look up keywords like "telecommuting", who gets to write all the abstracts and index entries that appear to help me find those articles in recent periodicals? I'd *love* to do that! How do I get that job? Peg Mauer Communication Link ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:41:16 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: PC: terms vs. concepts My hat's off to you in dealing with this extremely delicate situation. I don't know *how* I would have ever handled this. I think you made some wise choices. I think I'd've run around screaming. BTW, what's your first name, Mr. or Ms. King? I feel so formal addressing you this way! If you usually go by your first initial, please ignore my question! Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "But a lifetime of happiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth."--George Bernard Shaw ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 12:04:19 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Larry Harrison Subject: Re: Stubborn reading. Pilar wrote: >BTW, as to reading those student tests in the books we index, I justify that >as helpful for determining how to phrase my entries, in anticipation of how >students may use the index... ;-) > >from one weirdo to another?!, >Pilar Well, on one math book I wasn't supposed to index the exercises and appendix, but there were a couple of terms used in the text which were *only* defined in the exercises and appendix. I could picture the poor student, late at night, trying to find out what the Weierstrass M-test is. I included those entries and pointed them out to the client, who was grateful. I wouldn't have found them had I not read the entire book. Regards, Larry Harrison (larryh@millcomm.com) Freelance book indexing* Rochester, Minnesota *What's book indexing? ---> ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 14:20:34 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Mary S Stephenson Subject: Re: Per-entry rates In-Reply-To: <199609091802.LAA05351@unixg.ubc.ca> While the new draft ANSI/NISO standard, "Indexes and Related Information Retrieval Devices," does have some problems, it also contains a clear answer to what constitutes an entry: "The representation of a documentary unity in a displayed index. It consists of at least a heading and a locator. More than one locator may follow a given heading in a displayed entry array, but each locator, in combination with its heading, represents a single entry." Based on this definition if you are charging per entry, then the combination of one heading and 8 locators = 8 entries. On other hand, in the first edition of Hans Wellisch's "Indexing From A to Z" he defines an entry as: "A record in an index, consisting of a main headings and followed by one or more locators..." On the other hand in his section of fees and the subsection "Payment per 1,000 locators" he says that a heading with the locators "13-16" counts as four locators -- which is more or less agreement with the ANSI/NISO definition. In what I've always considered the last word on setting fees, he recommended: "An hourly indexing fee should always be at least four time the wage one can earn by flipping hamburgers at a fast-food emporium, and should be no less than six to seven times that amount for indexing which demands high or unusual skills and an intimate knowledge of a field or discipline (even though this may be an ideal level of remuneration which an only seldom be achieved)." As to myself, on when I have charged "per entry" then I've always used the equivalent of the ANSI/NISO definition, so one heading with 5 locators = 5 entries. Susie Stephenson UBC/SLAIS mss@unixg.ubc.ca On Mon, 9 Sep 1996 JPerlman@AOL.COM wrote: > As you can see from the two postings so far, there is general disagreement on > this subject. Pam said that in her experience, the example was charged as 2 > strings, so therefore 2 entries. Marilyn and Andre said there were 8 page > locators, so therefore 8 entries. > > Please -- I hope more of you post your opinion here. Inquiring minds really > need to know how this is generally handled. > > Or is the conclusion to speak to clients and negotiate carefully? > > Janet Perlman > Southwest Indexing > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 14:40:54 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Editing I guess that, having gone through the proverbial midlife career crisis, a whole lotta other things have changed in my life. And I find that I'm indexing differently than I did *before* I had the crisis. Before crisis (BC?? ;} ), I marked up my pages very heavily. I tried to create an organizational scheme as I was reading and marking up. By the time I got to inputting, I had a scheme pretty well fixed in my mind. Yes, any number of times, I did *change* my mind. I tended to--and still tend to--get "brilliant" (!) inspirations while I'm taking a shower. Suddenly, I'd know what to do with that section that'd just about driven me crazy! After crisis (AC?? ;] ), I read and input. It's not that I think less about what I'm reading. It's just that my editing has become kinda evolutional. I edit as I go, rather than editing at the very end. Yes, I still have to edit and rethink things at the end. But I rather like this way of doing things. It's a change, anyway! And I don't think that either method is the right way or the wrong way. I continue to keep a sheet of paper next to me for writing down questions. "Does X = Y?" is a frequent query, when I don't know if terms are synonymous. If I can't solve the problem, I'll ask the editor or the author. Many times, the editor sends my index on to the author, for him or her to clear up the queries. Another topic: charging per entry. I have never charged this way, so I probably shouldn't even enter the discussion. But I think that apples odor of, 3, 5, 102 redness of, 77, 88, 99, 111 would be seven entries, one for each locator. Intriguing discussion! Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "But a lifetime of happiness! No man alive could bear it: it would be hell on earth."--George Bernard Shaw ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 11:51:13 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carolyn Weaver Subject: Re: un-numbered locators In-Reply-To: <199609091647.JAA15410@mx3.u.washington.edu> For one of the journals I index, I occasionally have to index the cover photo/illustration. My solution is: The Jack Pine Cover illustration, January [this is an annual volume index, so date isn't needed.] So perhaps you can just use the physical location as the locator, e.g., Bylaws text of, unnumbered preface Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, Wa. e-mail: cweaver@u.washington.edu voice: 206/930-4348 On Sat, 7 Sep 1996, Kari Bero wrote: > I'm indexing a book about an organization's official document. The full > text of the document appears in the beginning of the book, _before page > numbering begins_. The document faces page 1, but has no number. Yes, > folks, there aren't even roman numerals on these pages of front matter. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 07:45:13 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sharon Hughes Subject: Re: Per-entry rates Pam said that in her experience, the example was charged as 2 >strings, so therefore 2 entries. Marilyn and Andre said there were 8 page >locators, so therefore 8 entries. > >Please -- I hope more of you post your opinion here. Inquiring minds really >need to know how this is generally handled. >Or is the conclusion to speak to clients and negotiate carefully? In Pam's example there are 8 locators so we would charge for 8 entries. (Journal indexing) You definately need to be on the same wavelength as the people you are billing. Sharon ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 17:03:26 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Per-entry rates In a message dated 96-09-09 14:03:18 EDT, Janet wrote: > As you can see from the two postings so far, there is general disagreement on > this subject. Pam said that in her experience, the example was charged as 2 > strings, so therefore 2 entries. Marilyn and Andre said there were 8 page > locators, so therefore 8 entries. > > Please -- I hope more of you post your opinion here. Inquiring minds really > need to know how this is generally handled. I'd also like to know how in the heck do folks count each locator without incurring a terminal case of tedium, miscounts when the phone rings or someone in the room happens to say a number about something unrelated, etc. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 17:03:25 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Editing tips? In a message dated 96-09-09 13:49:30 EDT, Janet wrote: > A suggestion for you: Some people keep an off-computer list of questions, > terms, problems to be resolved. I have no problem with that, but keep in > mind that such a list could be incorporated into the computer file (index), > by creating an entry that is a question or note to yourself, and giving it > the main entry term that would put it in the correct place alphabetically > where you would want it to be to trigger the question when the entries are > right there with it. say!> Janet, Yes, you do make sense!!! I keep a spiral bound notebook beside the computer where I jot down notes with a page or two devoted to each project (some not having to do with any particular entries). However, your suggestion about incorporating some of these notes into the index itself is an excellent one that I've used. (I put them in italics so that I can easily see them and strip them out of the index.) So, some of these things get double-posted, so to speak, into the index and into the logbook. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 17:03:22 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Editing tips? In a message dated 96-09-09 12:20:25 EDT, HM wrote: > Lynn, I feel I can't give examples from last book as I've made some other > comments on the list about it and so want to make sure I keep project > confidential. I'm going to be looking over the pre-final draft ms for > the next text today and I'll pick a few terms I know I'm going to have > difficulty with to post as examples. Thesaurus -- maybe but many times > the problem is the particular spin the author is giving to these terms. > Defining them in the text ... makes it hard to trust an outside source. > Author was somewhat helpful in clarifying but not enough to make a succinct > index. Thanks, you always post excellent messages. HM, ooooh, you *are* in a bind, especially with those confidentiality constraints! Plus, I understand what you mean about the author putting a particular spin on terms and defining them in the text. This is one of the most difficult vocabulary control problems I have faced--the author using/defining a term with an important variance from common usage. It's almost impossible sometimes to deal with these situations without creating an intricate web of cross references. Even worse is when an author actually misuses a term. That really has you pulling out your hair, if only because of not wanting to "dignify" it in the index. ;-D I remember indexing a technology textbook that made the grandiose attempt to cover all types of technology (aiiish!). I had problems throughout the book, but was at the point of actually throwing things when I encountered a sloppy reference to computers "integrating" signals and it was unclear whether the author was using the term "integrate" in the sense of "combining" or in the electronic sense of integrating a signal as in a specific waveshaping circuit that performs the electrical equivalent of the integral function in the calculus. (Either way, the reference was so goofy in context that I didn't index it.) To make matters worse, it was in the section that attempted to cover the broad field of electronics, complete with incorrectly labeled logic gates. (To knit this with a thread here on notifying editors of problems, the logic gate problem was one that I *had* to flag for the client because I couldn't sleep knowing that kids were actually supposed to learn this erroneous stuff.) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 17:03:20 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Thinking. (Was: my two cents (rates, etc.)) In a message dated 96-09-09 11:44:00 EDT, Glenda wrote: > I also relate to a description I once read about librarians, which said they > were such inveterate readers that they will read anything in front of them, > including the sides of cereal boxes etc. In a book I recently indexed I read > all the exercises for students at the end of each chapter. I *knew* I > wouldn't give any index terms, and I *knew* that I would learn nothing > useful from it, but my sense of completeness just wouldn't let me skim. To > this extent I would call part of my indexing a hobby. I spend time doing > things that are not crucial for the quality of the job, but are crucial to > my job satisfaction. Glenda, I actually (lightly) index the exercises in a textbook, including them under headings pointing to the task or concept they are supposed to reinforce. I don't know if folks would consider this overindexing, but I justify it on the principle that they are an important part of a textbook and that some students may indeed look in the index to locate the particular exercises relevant to a particular task. Aside from reading them for the purpose of indexing them, I skim them because they sometimes clarify something that wasn't particularly clear in the text. Other than that, I find exercises (or procedures in software manuals), especially in textbooks purporting to teach someone how to use a certain software package dreadfully boring. (How many times can you read "Click OK" before your eyes roll up into your head in terminal boredom?;-D) > > I would be interested to know how many of you are the stubborn readers, and > how many are the real pros who can skim through a book picking out the > important bits without wallowing in the content. I'm in the stubborn reader camp (except for exercises and repetitive procedures), mainly because I'm usually fascinated by what I'm indexing. Even passing references that I don't find indexable are tucked away in some dusty corner on my mind on the premise that, somewhere in life (including indexing another book on the same subject), this bit of trivia will become useful information. Alright, I admit it. I'm an information junkie (and confess to reading cereal boxes from when I first learned to read). ;-D Fortunately, despite being a stubborn reader, I'm also a fast reader, so I read intensely at the speed that an average reader would consider "skimming". (Probably all of us who read for a living read at the same blinding speed.) > > And one last note on the psychology of indexers: My sister is doing an > editing course, and was told that indexers are interesting people. > 'Interesting' was said in a way which implied 'strange', and the teacher > said that you could tell an indexer's perspective and obsessions from the > terms they include in the index. An interesting observation, and one far > removed from our own vision of ourselves (My personal response is that she > might be reflecting her *own* problems...). "Interesting" as in "may you live in interesting times"? ;-D Speaking only for myself, I admit to sometimes wondering if I was born on the right planet. However, the teacher may not be too far off the mark about an indexer's perspective and obsessions being indicated by the terms included in the index. There have been times when I've been tempted to include something in an index that I realized was based on my personal obsessions (making it stand out in the text) rather than how truly indexable it was. So, my internal indexing monitor has a subroutine programmed to catch such lapses in self-discipline. ;-D Another indication that the teacher may have seen indexes containing the flaws she mentioned is that all of us see the world and read texts through our own personal filters, though we strive to be as objective as possible in our approach. Thanks for bring up such an interesting topic, Glenda! Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 17:03:16 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: The Ideal Index In a message dated 96-09-09 11:43:24 EDT, you write: > A few years ago (in The Indexer?) I read a comparison of the use of 'little > words' (such as conjunctions) in subdivisions in award winning indexes and > those to other books on similar subjects. The authors found that > award-winning indexers use many less little words than other indexers. > > Since then I have omitted 'little words' where I think I can do without > them. It funny though, as in the last few weeks Jon and I have each been > checking indexes for the other, and the most common suggestion we have made > is to add these 'little words' back in. So, as index readers, it seems that > these words, even the almost meaningless 'and', make the index clearer to us. Glenda, I omit the "little words" whenever I can for the following reasons: 1) one client's style guide absolutely forbids their use (even as the last word of a subentry) except when they're absolutely needed for clarity (and their definition of clarity is more restrictive than mine); 2) when embedding in MS Word there is no way to prevent Word from sorting on them; 3) when embedding in FrameMaker, one has to type a sort string to prevent FrameMaker from sorting on them--tedious. As you and Jon do, I do find that the index is often murkier without them and I know that if I can't understand my very own index entries, I certainly couldn't expect a reader to. So, I end up adding them, except for the client who forbids them and when embedding in Word. Despite this, my indexes tend to contain few of the "little words" even when I'm not embedding or indexing for the client who forbids their use because of habits formed by these constraints. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 17:03:14 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Suggestion Linda, I subscribed to Copyediting-L for all of a week and I really didn't find those categories at all helpful. The volume on that list is soooooo huge and so much of it is pure repetition that I found that the subject line was for more useful for knowing when to hit the delete key (threads that were done beyond death). The volume here on Index-L has really exploded over the last week or so, but we're so much more disciplined here in *what* we post even during times like now when we're posting like crazy. (Plus, we have these spasms only every so often, then all of us starlings settle down on our branches for a while. ;-D) BTW, welcome to the list!! (And I hope I was being kind. ;-D) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 13:09:44 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Michael Brackney Subject: Re: un-numbered locators On Sat, 7 Sep 1996 Kari Bero wrote: >I'm indexing a book about an organization's official document. The full >text of the document appears in the beginning of the book, _before page >numbering begins_. The document faces page 1, but has no number. Yes, >folks, there aren't even roman numerals on these pages of front matter. > >Whatever shall I do? ... I could choose to not include a reference to it >in the index, and hope readers will find it on their own. (ick) Or, I >could use page 1 as the locator, and hope readers look on the facing page >& see it. (ick) Or, I could add a note as the locator: > XXX > ... > text of, facing 1 >This seems to be the best option, but if I did this, I would need the >locator to be clear and concise. Dear Kari: This may be too late to be of much help, but in case not here 'tis: I share your distaste for not including a reference to the document and for using page 1 as the locator for it: of all the options suggested so far I like yours best. (Though "_frontispiece_" is a fine locator, it wouldn't do in this case because the document does not appear in front of the title page.) I'd modify your suggestion to read "_facing page 1_" (in italics) for the sake of clarity (and elegance). Unlike all the normal page numbers, the number in the phrase without the clarifying word "page" looks too bare and could call up extra thoughts like "ah yes, that must mean 'page 1'". And, "_facing page 1_" is still quite concise (though if two+ spaces made a difference you could make it "_facing p. 1_"). What if the document were printed on the page preceding the page facing page one? Or if the document were two or more pages long? Maybe "_preceding page 1_" is the best we could do. All the best, Michael Brackney Indexing Service 134 Kathleen Way Grass Valley, CA 95945 916 272-7088 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 16:05:51 EDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "EL-FATA,CORINE,MS" Corinne El-Fata ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 14:52:24 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Michael K. Smith" Subject: Crucial bitnet test msg My apologies for burdening the list with a test message, but my ISP seems to be what Hazel calls "Bitnet challenged." (It's been bouncing back all my posts for the past couple of weeks, though I can receive the list just fine...) If this note appears in my next received mail -- THANKS, HAZEL! Mike Smith Editorial Services Michael K. Smith mksmith@onramp.net +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ It doesn't *take* all kinds; we just *have* all kinds ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 14:39:42 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: MariaYoung@AOL.COM Subject: CINDEX help during off-hours I just wanted to let all CINDEX users know that there is technical support available for outside of usual business hours by sending a message to: askcindex@aol.com I try to check the mail at least once in the evenings, and at least once or twice a day most weekends. In addition, there is a message board on AOL where CINDEX users regularly share questions and comments about using CINDEX. You can e-mail me directly for help in locating it. Maria Sullivan Young Indexing and CINDEX Support Services ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 14:39:40 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: MariaYoung@AOL.COM Subject: Re: CINDEX Help Requested In a message dated 96-09-09 11:42:19 EDT, you write: << CINDEX is not sorting the records the way I need it to. All of the entries that have quotation marks are sorted at the beginning of the index, before the A's. >> CINDEX allows you to choose the type of sort you want, and assign precedence to different types of characters within that sort. By issuing the SOrt command, you can choose one of "Simple," "Letter," or "Word." The letter-by-letter and word-by-word sort (in this version and all earlier versions) will ignore leading quotation marks, and sort on the first letter or word of your main entry. As for your run-over question, the CINDEX default for runovers is two spaces, but you can easily change this to five spaces on the SET FORmat screen. However, if you'd like to have runover indentations appear in your WordPerfect file, it's best to use WordPerfect's capabilities for formatting line lengths and runovers. So much of formatting and spacing is dependent on line length, spacing, font size and type, etc. that you probably wouldn't get an ideal match. However, if you want to give it a try by using CINDEX's settings, set the runover spacing using the SET FORmat screen. Make sure that you are in VI/FORM, and type PR/FILE at the command line. In the dialog box that pops up, set file type to WP5. Answer "no" to the question asking "Insert tags?" yes to the questions "Use layout widths?" and "Use format indents." This will tell CINDEX to break lines exactly as you see them on the screen. This means that CINDEX will insert a hard return at the end of each line, not just at the end of each entry. Make sure that you have your column width set narrower than the margins that you plan to use in WordPerfect, or WordPerfect will also be breaking lines for runovers! Good luck ! Maria Sullivan Young ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 10:15:15 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Roberta Horowitz Subject: Re: Indexing newspapers/Database Indexing In-Reply-To: <199609091758.KAA08679@mail6.netcom.com> For the last six months, I have read the messages on index-l but not been able to contribute much as the focus has been on back of the book indexing rather than database indexing. In answer to your question about who does all the indexing and abstracting for online databases, the answer is indexers and abstractors that work for the database producer. If you are interested in this field you would need to contact the producer of the database you are interested in working for. For example, the National Library of Medicine produces Medline. To find the names of databases and the company that produces them you might want to check out Cuadra Directory of Online Databases, most academic libraries and many public libraries will have a copy. If you can not locate a copy, you can contact Cuadra at 310 478-0066 hp@cuadra.com Database indexing is different in that you will mostly like only work for one company. This is due to possible conflict of interests and the competitive nature of online databases. The other problem of trying to work for more than one company, is the potential for getting very confused with the various controlled vocabularies/thesauri you would need to be familiar with. Indexing for online databases is different than back of the book indexing as the objective is to descrip the content of the document using a controlled vocabulary rather than pointing the user to the information in that particular book, using the author's terms. For database indexing, content analysis is essential. Though each database producer wil have their own requirements, I have found that subject expertise is necessary to produce consistent indexing especially for technical topics. As for the abstracts, database producers either use the ones written by the author or have in-house staff that writes them. Roberta Horowitz roberta@netcom.com On Mon, 9 Sep 1996 Pmauer@AOL.COM wrote: > In a message dated 96-09-09 11:50:22 EDT, you write: > > << I'm interested in anyone's views/experiences on what the > recommended indexing would be for electronic newspapers. >> > > I've wondered about this too. I also wonder who gets the job of writing the > indexes and abstracts for all of the periodical articles. When I go to the > library and use the electronic indexes on CD-ROM to look up keywords like > "telecommuting", who gets to write all the abstracts and index entries that > appear to help me find those articles in recent periodicals? I'd *love* to do > that! How do I get that job? > > Peg Mauer > Communication Link > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 10:19:01 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: per-entry rates Thanks much to all who responded re. how to count entries--not that we have to be done with the discussion. I had a feeling everybody was doing it differently. You folks are the best! Cheers, Carol ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 10:18:56 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: un-numbered locators >I'm indexing a book about an organization's official document. The full >text of the document appears in the beginning of the book, _before page >numbering begins_. The document faces page 1, but has no number. Yes, >folks, there aren't even roman numerals on these pages of front matter. > I would probably say "front matter" for the locator. Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | Life is good. Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | Milwaukee, WI | ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 10:18:47 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: Suggestion >Over at Copyediting-L, the CEL-mates have a system for naming your subject >when posting to the list. >From the Guidelines to using the list: > >Create your own as needed to fit your subject-- check the list of >"limited use" and "banned" tags below. > USAGE: usage or grammar issue > STYLE: style issue Sorry Linda, but I, for one hated that system (when I was on copyediting-l). For one thing, the list was far too long, and it was a pain in the patootie to have to look up a code every time you want to post. Furthermore, not everybody uses the codes. You'll be happy to know, though, that the chat is pretty minimal on this list, and the volume is not usually as high as it has been of late. Nothing personal, of course, but you did ask what we thought (at least I read you that way). Oh, and by the way, welcome to Index-L. ;-) No seriously, welcome! Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | Life is good. Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | Milwaukee, WI | ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 15:06:58 UT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Joanne Clendenen Subject: Re: Editing tips? Janet, you wrote <> Acknowledged, but with CINDEX, I find that the notes can get lost, especially if I'm in edit mode, and my deleted entries are visible. I know I can get rid of them by some command called SQUEEZE, but I'm afraid to ditch the garbage until I'm sure I won't be using it again. I suppose if the notes could be set off in a different style or color, I might notice them better. A Windows version of CINDEX would also provide better use of such options, along with several others, like seeing both the edited and formatted views side by side. Meanwhile, I think I'll stick to my little slips of paper. Thanks. Joanne J_Clendenen@msn.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 10:25:10 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Message traffic Is there less traffic on INDEX-L right now or am I missing messages or are we being monitored again? ************ Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 08:20:51 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Melissa Moore Subject: Re: Indexing newspapers Hi. I'm with Peg. How does one get into that line of work - indexing and abstracting for periodicals. Where do they advertise? Thank you, Melissa Moore Asst. Librarian, Technical Services At 01:35 PM 9/9/96 -0400, you wrote: >In a message dated 96-09-09 11:50:22 EDT, you write: > ><< I'm interested in anyone's views/experiences on what the > recommended indexing would be for electronic newspapers. >> > >I've wondered about this too. I also wonder who gets the job of writing the >indexes and abstracts for all of the periodical articles. When I go to the >library and use the electronic indexes on CD-ROM to look up keywords like >"telecommuting", who gets to write all the abstracts and index entries that >appear to help me find those articles in recent periodicals? I'd *love* to do >that! How do I get that job? > >Peg Mauer >Communication Link > > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 06:57:49 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rachel Rice Subject: horrified and sorry Well I am red faced and horribly ashamed and I might never write another reply again. I was so uncareful and sent private replies to letters that ended up on the list. Of course they were of a very private nature and were not intended for all your eyes. I am so sorry if anyone was offended. I could not possibly be more embarassed. Going into lurk mode. Maybe forever. My abject apologies. Rachel Rachel Rice Directions Unlimited Desktop Services Chilmark, Mass. rachelr@tiac.net; http://www.tiac.net/users/rachelr/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 06:51:30 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Re: CINDEX Help Requested Hi, Jennifer. Although I have used CINDEX for about a year and a half, I find that I learn something new every single time I use it. At 07:17 PM 9/7/96 -0500, Jennifer J Shakal wrote: >I have everything input and am now ready to export from CINDEX to >WordPerfect 6.1. CINDEX is not sorting the records the way I need it >to. All of the entries that have quotation marks are sorted at the >beginning of the index, before the A's. I have searched the manual and >the help screens for a way to tell CINDEX to ignore beginning quotes in >alphabetizing but cannot find it. I'm sure there is some simple way to >set this, as you can set so many other things in CINDEX but I am at a >loss as to what it is. REPLY: Have you set the SORT option of Type (s/l/w) to l or w? I use quotes all the time in CINDEX and have no problem as long as "s" is not selected in the Type option in SORT. Also look on page 132 (Fig. 10-4) of the manual where it says Character precedence s/n/l; I never change anything here and everything always goes well. >A second question, that I could fix manually, but again I'm sure there >must be a way to tell CINDEX to do it, is this: how to tell CINDEX to >wrap run-over lines one indent (5 spaces). For example, for long titles >that go over one line in length. REPLY: This is one that I, too, would like to have good answer to. I put the files into .rtf format and in default the turnover lines in Word end up being 4 spaces over and the initial indent is 1 space instead of two (i.e., the first indent is placed under the second letter of the heading instead of the third). If I say yes to the SET TYPE options (File Type, Insert Tags, Use Layout Width, Use Layout Spacing, Use Format indents) that pop up when you print/file=a:\ (to disk) or print/file=c:\WORD\ (to word processing program), then it seems impossible to change anything (like line spacing or margins) in the word processing program. NEW QUESTION: Also, has anyone ever had problem with CINDEX misreading end of file for some reason and saying that the total number of lines is a lot less than it actually is? If so, what IS the problem? ************ Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 10:01:00 BST-1 Reply-To: jwalton@cix.compulink.co.uk Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: J Walton Subject: RESIGN RESIGN ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 23:44:22 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: KINGH@SNYSYRV1.BITNET Subject: Janet's neat idea and Hazel's question Janet, great idea: putting tickler note and making sure it will alphabetize where you need it. I'm going to start that -- I've been writing notes to myself and losing notes to myself. For Hazel and anyone else who'd like to know: HM King = Hannah kingh@vax.cs.hscsyr.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 20:00:00 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Re: Per-entry rates I am going to quote from Churchill Livingstone's definition of entry for per-entry charging (this is from a handout given to the participants at the medical indexing roundtable in Denver given by Donna Balopole--thanks, Donna): "1. An entry must have either a cross-reference or page number attached to it to be counted. 2. Turnover lines are not counted. Examples: Platelets administration of, 550t preoperative, 404 count of in aging, 9 preoperative, 404, 409 The above is four entries Pain, abdominal, in Crohn's disease, 196-197, 305. See also Crohn's disease The above is one entry." At 01:17 PM 9/9/96 -0400, JPerlman@AOL.COM wrote: >As you can see from the two postings so far, there is general disagreement on >this subject. Pam said that in her experience, the example was charged as 2 >strings, so therefore 2 entries. Marilyn and Andre said there were 8 page >locators, so therefore 8 entries. > >Please -- I hope more of you post your opinion here. Inquiring minds really >need to know how this is generally handled. > >Or is the conclusion to speak to clients and negotiate carefully? > >Janet Perlman >Southwest Indexing > > ************ Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 19:29:22 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Per-entry rates In a message dated 96-09-06 20:39:45 EDT, you write: > Several of you have posted per-entry rates. Can you tell us what you count > as an entry? Does the following count as 1, 2, 4, or 8 entries? > > high culture > vs. popular culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 > popular culture > vs. high culture, 30, 73, 155-56, 215 Carol, Only once have I worked for per entry rates, but when I did, I counted your examples as two entries. (I used the entry number given by Macrex, which would have counted these as two entries.) As it turned out, the publisher burned me anyway by paying me two months late (after past due notices with late fees tacked on) and inexplicably several hundred dollars less than what I invoiced (despite my generous system ;-D). And, this is aside from the fact that I lost thousands of dollars by turning down good, well-paying clients while working on their blasted book. (I learned from this experience not to turn down work once a publisher's schedule begins to slip. They now go to the back of the line.) However, I do like the per/entry system, especially for indexing entry-dense texts as this one was (a double-column, coffeetable-sized medical book). Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical & Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 19:00:08 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rachel Rice Subject: Re: need help!! on length Hi Wilde, I actually managed to get (at Times, 9pt, 40 chars/col, 1 col) from the original 34 pages down to just under 12, which the publisher will be able to squeeze into 6 pp by using 2 cols and tight tracking, and by enclosing a magnifier with each copy of the book. I took every single piece of advice offered by you and everyone. On my own I knew I had better index as if I had all the room I needed. I agree it was easier in the long run than if I had under-indexed and had to go and find something I should have put in. > >Doesn't this seem to always be the case when you have a problem index? Good >luck!! I'd pack up the TECHindexMobile (complete with flashing lights and >sirens) and deploy my Indexing Emergency Response Team (family) to help you >out if I could. But Edouard wiped out the indexer-in-crisis blip on our >situation room radar until now. ;-D Please bring the TECHindexMobile any time you'd like. If you're ever out this way, please think of coming to visit me! > >> PS anyone got a good remedy for poison ivy? > >How in the heck did you get poison ivy with a hurricane going on?!! Were you >outside having a Hurricane Party or something? ;-D It was before Edouard. We had 2 stray horses in our yard. How many people do you know who get stray *horses* at their doorstep? Well, I know the horses and where they came from, and being a horse person, I simply took them home. On the way, passed through a PI patch. I washed my legs but somehow it got on my stomach, upper thighs, breasts, and right eyelid. I thought I had been careful not to touch myself, but somehow. . . And then, I burned my leg with a pot of rice and beans (I live alone and always eat out of the cook pot, or used to . . .) and it got infected and I had an allergic reaction to the antibiotic so I have a rash all over my torso including breasts and under them, superimposed on the PI. A more miserable soul cannot be found on Martha's Vineyard tonight. As Eeyore would say, "Pathetic. That's what it is." Thanks for your advice. It was helpful. You're great! Rachel Rachel Rice Directions Unlimited Desktop Services Chilmark, Mass. rachelr@tiac.net; http://www.tiac.net/users/rachelr/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 18:47:45 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Markinch@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Teleworkers needed for study Hi there. Interested in your study. Fill me in with the details. Doug Thompson @ Markinch@aol.com. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 18:40:57 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: Author's emphasis not the point In a message dated 96-09-09 12:22:52 EDT, Maryann Corbett wrote: >I'd say that as often as not, it's important for the indexer NOT to pay >attention to "emphasis" as the author assigns it, but to know well what >the audience is likely to need to look up. Amen. Before deciding to take the USDA course in indexing, I got a bunch of books on publishing out of the library. One of the most useful ones -- and one of the few to discuss the role of indexers, and indeed mention the USDA course -- did not have an index. I looked all through the book for mentions of freelance possibilities, and found several, but they were not grouped in the text and obviously were not highlighted by the author. A good index would have pulled together exactly what I needed to know. (I thought of using this very book for one of my sample indexes! I may yet.) Helen Schinske HSchinske@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 18:41:02 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: Re: un-numbered locators In a message dated 96-09-09 15:20:31 EDT, you write: >The Jack Pine > Cover illustration, January [this is an annual volume index, so date >isn't needed.] Carolyn -- what would happen if the indexes were cumulated? Or made searchable online? Helen HSchinske@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 18:40:48 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: Re: Sample indexes In a message dated 96-09-09 11:40:59 EDT, Hazel wrote: >As it turns out, I've indexed a number of books on one of this press's big >topics. I mentioned this to the editor. She did not want to see these >indexes, however. Only people who have an academic degree in this subject >area are allowed to index it. My guess -- and since I'm new to this, it's only a guess -- is that this editor is trying to revamp standards for choosing indexers (or someone above her is), and is getting so caught up in applying the new standards that she's being much too rigorous. I think anyone with as much experience as you should not have to play these games, that your current portfolio should provide all the information she really needs. I'm confused about "only people who have an academic degree ... " Does that mean she doesn't want to see your indexes in the field of X-ology because you're not an X-ologist, so she wouldn't be allowed to hire you for that anyway? The whole business sounds like way too much trouble for her as well as for everybody else. Wouldn't you get bored comparing a lot of indexes to the same thirty pages? Oh, wait -- USDA pays you to do that. Hey, maybe she'd subcontract the index comparisons to you! :) Now there's an idea ... Or you could get hold of the book and just copy from the book's index and see what happened. If you get a "Wonderful! Exactly right! You're hired!" instead of a "Wait a minute ..." then maybe this REALLY isn't someone you want to work for. (Is this book supposed to have an ideal index already, or a crappy index?) Seriously, I think if I had heard from this editor I, as a neophyte, would have jumped at the chance to show off -- but you shouldn't have to. After all, we're talking about a couple of hundred bucks worth of your time here. Does this editor want any indexers with degrees in anthropology? Tell her to talk to Lawrence Feldman. Helen Schinske HSchinske@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 18:22:03 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: AZ/ASI Workshop November 16 This is the first full announcement of this workshop. Open to ASI members and non-members alike. Further info? Janet Perlman: jperlman@aol.com AMERICAN SOCIETY OF INDEXERS, ARIZONA GROUP Professional Development Workshop EDITING AN INDEX FOR QUALITY AND USABILITY Saturday, November 16, 1996, 8:30 AM to 5 PM Arizona State University, Memorial Union, Tempe, Arizona This first annual AZ/ASI Workshop is a hands-on skills workshop for indexers and editors who want to know how to evaluate the usability, exhaustivity, and quality of an index. The workshop emphasizes concepts of retrievability, consistency, and usability. Workshop participants will work in groups to evaluate sample indexes and problem solve. PROGRAM SCHEDULE 8:30 - 9:00 AM Registration and Networking 9:00 to Noon Workshop Noon to 1:30 PM Lunch (on your own) and more networking 1:30 PM to 4:00 PM Workshop 4:00 to 5:00 PM Networking; ASI Business Meeting ABOUT OUR PRESENTER LORI LATHROP has over 16 years experience as a technical writer, editor, and professional indexer whose indexing skills and index evaluation workshops for corporate clients and professional organizations are very much in demand throughout North America. Confirmations (to include driving/parking instructions) will be mailed for registrations received by November 8th. Refunds are subject to a $5 handling fee. On-site registrations accepted as space permits. _____________________________________________________________________________ REGISTRATION FORM ASI Members Non-ASI Members Cost: Registrations received by 11/8 $50 $6 5 Registration 11/9 - 11/16 60 7 5 Name: _________________________________________ Fax: ___________________ _ Company: _____________________________________ Telephone: ______________ Mailing address: ________________________________________________________________ ASI Member? [ ] Yes; [ ] No. Chapter? _______ _______________________ Registrations must include checks made payable to ASI/Arizona Chapter. Mail checks and registration forms to: Barbara Wallace, AZ/ASI, 1945 West Dunlap Ave., Suite 9-336, Phoenix, AZ 85021. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 17:57:49 EDT 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: Per-entry rates In-Reply-To: note of 09/09/96 13:19 Doesn't Cindex have a feature that tells you how many entries there are in the index? I seem to recall (on the few indexes I have participated in) pushing a button or two in Cindex to get the number of entries. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 13:50:41 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Nancy C. Mulvany" Subject: Per Entry Rates When I charge a per entry rate it is because I'm dealing with something weird! I much prefer to charge a page rate but sometimes that just doesn't work. An entry is defined for billing purposes as a line in a Macrex page-number order file. So, the following entry, dogs, 3, 89-90, 125 See also AKC becomes in the page-number order file, dogs, See also AKC dogs, 3 dogs, 89-90 dogs, 125 This would be four entries. I have billed from $0.40 to $0.95 per entry. -nancy Nancy Mulvany ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 21:19:00 BST-1 Reply-To: jsampson@cix.compulink.co.uk Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: John Sampson Subject: Re: Editing tips? Other problems are the books that ring the changes at great length on eight or nine concepts and the complex relationships between them, or those with explicitly-competing systems of nomenclature, and argument as to what is an entity and what is not. We must be unbiassed in indexing, but sometimes we are pig in the middle. No bias, no index! _John Sampson_ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 15:54:45 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rachel Rice Subject: Re: Baby Sinclair That's him! It's still around in syndication and I watch it whenever I can. My error beep on my computer is Baby saying "I Love You" as only he can say it. I love hearing I love you when I've made a mistake! Did you know the voice is the same guy who does Elmo on Sesame street? Did you ever see his music video? Rachel + >I believe this would be a reference to the youngest child on the TV show >"Dinosaurs". A great show no longer on the air. Kind of a muppets meets the >Honeymooners/Donna Reed. > >Although Baby Sinclairs most oft quoted line, after he did something wrong, >was: "I'm the baby, gotta love me"! Rachel Rice Directions Unlimited Desktop Services Chilmark, Mass. rachelr@tiac.net; http://www.tiac.net/users/rachelr/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 12:12:30 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carolyn Weaver Subject: Re: Per-entry rates In-Reply-To: <199609091809.LAA24537@mx3.u.washington.edu> I raised this question about 2 years ago on this list and didn't get a definitive answer then, either. In the absence of a generally accepted definition, I either (1) negotiate the definition of an 'entry' in advance with the client, or (2) use the entry count that Cindex gives me for the 'write' .dat file. (This is usually a substantially larger number than the entry count for the formatted index, which seems to reflect the line count, regardless of the number of locators on the line.) I won't count locators manually unless required by the client. Which is why I prefer to charge by the hour or the page. I did have one client who wanted to pay half the entry rate for cross references. Is this standard practice for those who charge by entry? Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, Wa. e-mail: cweaver@u.washington.edu voice: 206/930-4348 On Mon, 9 Sep 1996 JPerlman@AOL.COM wrote: > As you can see from the two postings so far, there is general disagreement on > this subject. Pam said that in her experience, the example was charged as 2 > strings, so therefore 2 entries. Marilyn and Andre said there were 8 page > locators, so therefore 8 entries. > > Please -- I hope more of you post your opinion here. Inquiring minds really > need to know how this is generally handled. > > Or is the conclusion to speak to clients and negotiate carefully? > > Janet Perlman > Southwest Indexing > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 15:08:08 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Editing tips? In a message dated 96-09-09 13:49:44 EDT, you write: > Some people keep an off-computer list of questions, > terms, problems to be resolved. I have no problem with that, but keep in > mind that such a list could be incorporated into the computer file (index), > by creating an entry that is a question or note to yourself, and giving it > the main entry term that would put it in the correct place alphabetically > where you would want it to be to trigger the question when the entries are > right there with it. I always mark these with *** or some such easily-searched-for symbol, so that I can check to make sure I found them all. Mine mostly consist of a heading where I know I need to pull a few things together, and say "****Find more!" or "***Ask about this" or "***waiting for final terminology" Jan ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Sep 1996 15:07:51 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Suggestion In a message dated 96-09-09 11:41:28 EDT, you write: > Certainly, all these categories would not work for Index-L, but could we > come up with something that suited us? > For the last several years, Index-L has been fairly light in terms of amount of material, and has never been as crazed as copyedit-l, which I cannot subscribe to. Just too much mail on that one. This flurry of activity will probably die down again, and I would hate to have to put labels on everything. My two cents! Jan ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 08:37:02 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carolyn Weaver Subject: Re: un-numbered locators In-Reply-To: <199609111441.HAA02193@mx4.u.washington.edu> If that were to happen, I would make a global change in the locators (using a Cindex command) to add the year or volume number to all locators before merging the files. Actually, I've been indexing this quarterly journal for 5 years now, and I do create the indexes using a controlled vocabulary with the potential for eventually merging the annual files and minimizing the re-indexing that would be needed. This requires deliberately breaking some cross-reference rules used in back-of-the book indexing (e.g., when you have only one or two entries under a subject with a cross reference, double-post rather than make it a cross reference; I use the cross reference without double posting). I'm also very careful to track changes in the profession's vocabulary and to use it consistently in every annual index. I treat the annual indexes as sections of a cumulated index - whether or not the files ever get merged. The controlled vocabulary HAS evolved, but I do include a cross reference from the term used in previous indexes to make sure that I (and users) can track where the subject was indexed in previous volumes. Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, Wa. e-mail: cweaver@u.washington.edu voice: 206/930-4348 On Mon, 9 Sep 1996, Helen Schinske wrote: > In a message dated 96-09-09 15:20:31 EDT, you write: > > >The Jack Pine > > Cover illustration, January [this is an annual volume index, so date > >isn't needed.] > > Carolyn -- what would happen if the indexes were cumulated? Or made > searchable online? > Helen > HSchinske@aol.com > ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:48:59 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Heather L. Ebbs" Organization: Editor's Ink Subject: Re: Editing tips? Janet's suggestion about incorporating tickler notes in the computer file is similar to what I do. But rather than have these notes to myself throughout my index (as I'm afraid of missing one), I begin every note with aaa so that it appears at the very top of my (Macrex) index. That makes it easier for me to dump them all once I've resolved whatever the note is about. My aaa notes include queries about similar words for me to decide later, reminders of items I've temporarily chosen not to index or of items I have indexed but may need to take out if space is tight, queries about inconsistencies I might want to ask the editor about, formatting thoughts, reminders about peculiar spellings or name breaks, etc. Heather Ebbs editink@istar.ca ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:24:24 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Andre De Tienne Subject: Re: Per-entry rates >I am going to quote from Churchill Livingstone's definition of entry for >per-entry charging (this is from a handout given to the participants at the >medical indexing roundtable in Denver given by Donna Balopole--thanks, Donna): > >"1. An entry must have either a cross-reference or page number attached to >it to be counted. >2. Turnover lines are not counted. > >Examples: > >Platelets > administration of, 550t > preoperative, 404 > count of > in aging, 9 > preoperative, 404, 409 > >The above is four entries > >Pain, abdominal, in Crohn's disease, > 196-197, 305. See also Crohn's disease > >The above is one entry." > > >Cynthia D. Bertelsen Livingstone's definition is not satisfactory because of its ambiguity. You say that there are four entries in your first example according to his definition, even though one might well make the case that there are five entries using the same definition: each of the two page numbers after "preoperative" is equally attached to an entry, and so each should be counted separately. In your second example, by the same token, there are three entries. If Livingstone had said "An entry must have AT LEAST a cross-reference or page number attached to it to be counted", then you would be right, even though I think that revised definition should be rejected as well, for the sake of the profession. This is a matter of great importance, because it goes to show how much indexers appreciate and value their own work! If you (I mean, not you personally, Cynthia, but any indexer) are going to count the number of entries by the number of lines it takes in the index, you are seriously underestimating the value of your contribution to the book, and underestimating the very nature of your time and effort. Each locator is the result of much analytical work on your part (in average, since some entries may be much easier to create than others that will make you sleepless). If you have a string of five locators after a same heading, all it means logically is that the same heading is repeated five times, each time with one locator. The fact that the heading appears only once is accidental (i.e., just a matter of presentation), not essential (relating to the very nature of an entry). Whether you have five different headings, each one with just one locator, or one heading with five locators, makes no formal difference: in each case five index units were _entered_. Each time an index unit is entered, you've got one entry. By an index unit I understand one heading + one full determinant. A full determinant is either one locator (usually a page number, but it may be more complex when it has prefixes or suffixes), or a subheading + locator, or a subheading + subsubheading + locator, or a cross-reference. Do not forget that when you are creating and editing an index, you spend much time phrasing and rephrasing headings, combining or dividing them, moving locators here and there, deleting a few (work that will not be counted, then), etc. Each entry (or index unit) deserves the respect given to the combination of perspiration and inspiration that led to its making. Some people may find this approach too greedy. It is not. It's only realistic. Do have consideration for the value of your work, monetarily and otherwise. >I'd also like to know how in the heck do folks count each locator without >incurring a terminal case of tedium, miscounts when the phone rings or >someone in the room happens to say a number about something unrelated, etc. > >Lynn Moncrief My guess is that any indexing program will have a feature that allows you to count the number of locators automatically. HyperIndex has such a feature at any rate, and it can also count the number of main headings, subheadings, and subsubheadings regardless of how many locators are attached to them. Andre *************************************************************************** Andre De Tienne Tel.(W): 317-274-2033 Assistant Editor Tel.(H): 317-328-8789 Peirce Edition Project, IUPUI Fax: 317-274-2347 CA 545, 425 University Boulevard E-mail: adetienn@iupui.edu Indianapolis, IN 46202-5140 adetienn@indyvax.iupui.edu *************************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:48:40 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Andre De Tienne Subject: Re: Per-entry rates > >I am going to quote from Churchill Livingstone's definition of entry for >per-entry charging (this is from a handout given to the participants at the >medical indexing roundtable in Denver given by Donna Balopole--thanks, Donna): > >"1. An entry must have either a cross-reference or page number attached to >it to be counted. >2. Turnover lines are not counted. > I forgot to add to my previous posting that I also disagree with the second point in Livingstone's definition. Turnover lines must be counted as well. They are not a lesser kind of entry: you do not adjudge less monetary value to the creation of an entry because it was mechanically easy to make and did not require as much effort as an original entry. The reason is that not all entries are turned over (meaning entries where headings and subheadings are swapped). It is a matter of judgment when and how to do so. And sometimes doing so does require some rephrasing of an entry as well, for the sake of perspicuity. It's not simply automatic. And of course any turnover line does add information to the index, and does increase its usability. All reasons for not giving them away for free, unless you consider the editors you work for people who need charity. The point is: do not let anyone find ways do underestimate any portion of your work. Andre *************************************************************************** Andre De Tienne Tel.(W): 317-274-2033 Assistant Editor Tel.(H): 317-328-8789 Peirce Edition Project, IUPUI Fax: 317-274-2347 CA 545, 425 University Boulevard E-mail: adetienn@iupui.edu Indianapolis, IN 46202-5140 adetienn@indyvax.iupui.edu *************************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:41:31 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Re: Per-entry rates When I said I was going to quote from Churchill-Livingstone's handout, I meant just that. If you will note, I enclosed the whole lot in quotation marks. This is THEIR definition and I was merely sharing it. I agree; it seems like there should be more there than four entries and that is what I thought the first time I saw it. >>(Bertelsen's original post): I am going to quote from Churchill Livingstone's >>definition of entry for >>per-entry charging (this is from a handout given to the participants at the >>medical indexing roundtable in Denver given by Donna Balopole--thanks, Donna): >(De Tienne's comment): Do have consideration for the value of your work, monetarily >and otherwise. I do! ************ Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:52:16 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sanindex@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Per-entry rates I would go with 8 entries. The definition I use for a subject and a page number equals an entry. Sandi Schroeder ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:53:28 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sanindex@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Per-entry rates In counting entries, which I rarely use that method, I use Cindex's count. If you do a squeeze/single command, it will give you this number. Sandi Schroeder ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:55:49 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: Re: Editing tips? Sorry for adding to the overburdened list again, but I felt the urge to pass on how I write those little notes to remind me of things, etc. while indexing. It's fast, easy, and the notes are easily deleted. I have a macro for "aaa proof notes" or "aaa notes to myself" or "aaa queries" --- you get the idea--followed by the page number the note refers to, then the text of the note. They sort as entries at the top of the index, and then I can cut and paste into a note to the editor, or deal with them and delete, in the final word-processing pass. Example: aaa proof notes, p. 28: "...the group are known as..." should be "...the group is know as..." aaa proof notes, p. 32: word missing in last sentence on page These come out in the formatted index as: aaa proof notes p. 28: "...the group are known as..." should be "...the group is know as..." p. 32: word missing in last sentence on page The "notes to myself" can be about anything. I have also used note tags within entries, such as [n].....[n0] to embed notes to myself or the editor, with the instruction to search for them and delete after they are dealt with. But the index looks cleaner with the notes at the top. Now, if only I could remember to use the system for timekeeping, or to even write down my times more reliably, I'd have a handle on just how much, or how little, I am really making per hour! Elinor Lindheimer elinorl@mcn.org ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:04:20 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was maryann@REVISOR.LEG.STATE.MN.US From: Maryann Corbett Organization: Revisor of Statutes Subject: Re: Per-entry rates Andre De Tienne wrote: Turnover lines must be counted as well. > They are not a lesser kind of entry: you do not adjudge less monetary > value to the creation of an entry because it was mechanically easy to make > and did not require as much effort as an original entry. The reason is > that not all entries are turned over (meaning entries where headings and > subheadings are swapped). Now here's something interesting. When I first read the phrase "turnover lines" I certainly didn't think, as Andre does, that it meant what I call "rotations" of concepts, or "flips" as some programs call them. I thought it meant runovers, entries that contain enough characters that they must extend onto a second line. That's why I didn't give it a second thought that they weren't counted. I don't know how anybody could count entries if all the different ways to word one concept could only be counted as one entry! Does anybody know what Livingstone meant? Did others understand "turnovers" as Andre did? -- Maryann Corbett Language Specialist Office of the Revisor of Statutes Minnesota Legislature 612-297-2952 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 14:09:28 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Per-entry rates Andre, All of what you said makes sense. However, I don't know that you'll get many publishers to agree with you, or to go along with this way of of per-entry reimbursement. It will definitely cost them money, and, of course, this is the ongoing battle we (all indexers) face -- the Battle of the Rates. We are, unfortunately, consistently underpaid as professionals. We do, therefore, continue to strive to raise the prevailing rates, despite the current State of the Industry. And we must continue to do so, always taking the risk of losing a client because of our "high" rates or our militance on the subject. BTW, I never thought of using my indexing program to tell me how many page locators there are, rather than count them, but those of us using Macrex should be able to do that through the Utilities menu, Indexing Statistics command. Correct me if I'm wrong. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 14:12:44 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Re: Editing tips? At 05:03 PM 9/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >In a message dated 96-09-09 13:49:30 EDT, Janet wrote: > >> A suggestion for you: Some people keep an off-computer list of questions, >> terms, problems to be resolved. I have no problem with that, but keep in >> mind that such a list could be incorporated into the computer file >(index), >> by creating an entry that is a question or note to yourself I have been doing this for a long time but am perpetually paranoid about shipping an index with my notes still in it. Therefore, I have set up some CINDEX abbreviations that insert a row of dashes long enough to extend well beyond the longest index entry. I then type a brief note at the end of the dashed line. Notes stick out like proverbial sore thumbs. Also, I sometimes group note entries at the start of the file by beginning the note entries with a low-value ASCII character so that they all float to the top. Dick Evans ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 14:46:26 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Charlotte Skuster Subject: hold that thought ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hi all, You have no doubt noticed that index-l has been a bit jerky recently...stopping, starting. Reason is that we keep running out of disk space and I need to delete archives everytime that happens. I will request more disk space as soon as I can get to the computer center and I have been assured that it will be forthcoming as soon as the form is signed. I cannot get that taken care of today so I will resume moderating for the time being. That way, I can slow message traffic until more space is available. Sorry to have to do this...hopefully by tomorrow you can resume the free-wheeling discussion. I'll keep you posted. Charlotte Skuster Index-l moderator ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:12:28 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Termurray@aol.com Subject: Re: indexing school newspapers/first job? ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- In a message dated 96-09-06 20:56:17 EDT, Diane Worden wrote: ...I had occasion to use newspaper indexes of both a medium-sized city >(100,000) and university (30,000). ... The university, with a >50+ year history, microfilms the student newspaper without indexing it at >all. Neither experience is desirable, and you can bet that lack of money and >staff time are responsible. I don't think anyone has yet connected Diane's remark with the recent recommendations that new indexers volunteer their skills for that first job. If a local university doesn't index its school newspaper, maybe an offer to index the past year or two would be welcomed. Terry Murray