Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 20:44:42 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9610D" To: Julius Ariail ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 17:47:25 +1300 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Simon Cauchi Subject: Re: Opera Titles John Sampson asked: >> Adagio, _Oboe Concerto in C minor_ (Marcello) > >Would you put 'Adagio' as an entry term? I would have thought there were >too many pieces of classical music with an adagio movement to make this >specific enough. On second thoughts, probably not. There have been several very helpful and informative posts about how to index books about music since I sent off my own somewhat ill-considered offering. My only experience in this field was the index I prepared for the _Oxford History of New Zealand Music_. It was mainly an index of persons, and the titles of works occurred only under the names of two composers, the two most important NZ composers (though one of them settled eventually in Australia). I enjoyed constructing both those entries. Have you ever heard of Alfred Hill? Read all about him: Hill, Alfred begins career on cornet and New Zealand music and Wellington Orchestral Society and Maori music tours with Balling applies unsuccessfully for Auckland chair songs sung by Albani and Christchurch Exhibition Orchestra and Verbrugghen works recorded by HMV Lilburn's opinion of COMPOSITIONS _Hinemoa_ _A Moorish Maid_ _Tangi_ _Tapu_ _Time's Great Monotone_ 'Waiata Poi' (The subentries, all but the last, are arranged in chronological order.) >From Simon Cauchi, 13 Riverview Terrace, Hamilton, New Zealand Phone & fax +64 7 854 9229 e-mail cauchi@wave.co.nz ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 01:52:00 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: business names In a message dated 96-10-21 18:45:11 EDT, Jan wrote: > Yes, it usually costs more to have a fictitious business name (one in which > your own name doesn't appear). Fortunately, I could use my last name and > still make it a play on words at the same time - Wright Information Indexing > Services. (Wright Write Right, or however you want to read into it). But > definately register your business name with the state. Jan, I may be wrong about this, but I think the requirement for a fictious name (DBA) is a bit tighter than that. I think it's that, if your business name is anything other than your actual name (with no add-ons to it), you're supposed to file a DBA. (Your birth certificate doesn't identify you as Wright Information Indexing Services, does it? ;-D) Or maybe that's just the situation here in nit-picky California. BTW, you're so lucky to have one of those cool last names that you can incorporate into your business name like that. ;-D There was a guy here on the list (I haven't seen him post anything in a while) with the last name of Master and his business was Master Indexing (or something like that). Another supercool last name/business name like yours. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 01:52:09 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Flames, pajamas, and Indexing cookbooks Folks, Sorry, I can't resist this, but... Has anyone noticed the interesting juxtaposition of concepts in the subject line to this thread? It sounds as if you shouldn't index cookbooks (while experimenting with the recipes) without wearing flame-retardant pajamas! ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 01:54:55 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: Re: Flames, pajamas, etc. I would like to thank Leslie for her remarks about professional vs. personal comments on this list. It seemed ironic that the people expressing concern about nonprofessionalism were, by writing about their concerns, contributing to an atmosphere of nonprofessional negativity. I even saw personal notes passed between a couple of posters that should have been private email but instead were complete Index-L posts, including lengthy quotes from previous writers that we had already seen several times over. Indexers are isolated during their workday, and the Internet has helped to lessen that isolation and help us feel part of a community. Within that community, we usually show tolerance and respect for each other's differences. If an occasional light remark falls from out fingers, maybe we can all lighten up and let it go. Think of Index-L as the water cooler as well as the conference room. Does that help? Elinor Lindheimer elinorl@mcn.org ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 07:10:20 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Debra A. Bailey" Subject: Re: Flames, pajamas, and Indexing cookbooks Having read the original posting, the only thing that runs through my mind when reading this discussion on pajamas is - Has everyone lost their human side and sense of humor? I believe the comment was only intended as a small joke in the middle of a very pertinent discussion. Even CEOs in the middle of board meetings crack jokes. Deb Bailey ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 08:57:33 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Humor on index-l Because of the current tense climate on index-l, I attempted to introduce a tiny note of humor. The note was a response to a posting about someone's current comfort level with the list. I have definitely learned that (a) my own comfort level with the list is extremely low at this point; (b) humor is not allowed on index-l; and (c) I will be unsubscribing, at least for the time being, so that I do not commit the unpardonable sin of using humor on this list. Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 11:35:50 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: You learn the darndest things indexing!!!! I just thought I'd brighten everyone's day (or gross everyone out) with the following astounding fact I encountered in the book I'm currently indexing: There are two types of earwax!!!!! There is the sticky stuff that most folks have, then there is a gray, dry type. The sticky, lipid-rich type is secreted by 90% of European populations, whereas in northern China it is secreted by only 4% of the population. So, the type you have is genetically determined. (I can hardly wait to fly this one by my ear doctor who happens to be of Chinese descent. ;-D) OK, in a slightly more serious vein... We've been getting just a tad bit humor-impaired here on the Index-L "tree" (Deb's post put it very nicely). So, I thought that we could have a lighter, yet still indexing-related (by a bit of a stretch) perennial thread where we post some of the most off-the-wall, I-didn't-know-that!, trivial and goofy gems (any subject being fair game) that we come across while indexing. I know I've often wanted to post these things here, just for grins and giggles. We could use a subject line (maybe on the order of this one) that will warn those who aren't into indexable trivia to breeze by these items. Now, I'm sure that many of us here are information and trivia junkies and that it is part of the attraction that indexing holds for us. It's the spice that leavens the day, opens our eyes on all-nighters, gets us through tomes that no one else on earth would read, etc. Who knows? Maybe it could encourage folks reading this list, wondering about whether to get into indexing, to jump into the field so that they too could become walking fonts of oddball information. So, how about it, folks? Now, if this idea goes down in flames, well, at least I'm wearing my asbestos 'jammies. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex, Trivia, & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 11:58:19 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: business names In a message dated 96-10-22 09:00:58 EDT, you write: > if your business name is > anything other than your actual name (with no add-ons to it), you're > supposed > to file a DBA. (Your birth certificate doesn't identify you as Wright > Information Indexing Services, does it? ;-D) Well, in Wa. state, fictitious names are the ones without your last name in it at all. As long as my name was in it somewhere, it was the cheap variety of business name. California is probably more picky. This is definately something that should be researched in each state, as the requirements probably vary. Maybe my birth certificate does say that - I better get it out and look! All I remember is that there are small black footprints on it. Footprint indexing services? Jan Wright ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 12:07:02 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Non-competition agreements What are your thoughts/practices on non-competition agreements between you and your apprentices, subcontractors, and fellow indexers? Scenario A You take on an apprentice. Eventually, he is ready to solo and starts his own practice. What are your understandings regarding clients you introduced him to? Strictly off limits? OK to approach after a waiting period? Scenario B You have subcontracted work. Same question regarding the subcontractor. Scenario C You have an inquiry from a *new* client to do a book you aren't interested in or don't feel qualified to do. You give the client the name of a colleague, who accepts the assignment. What are the obligations of the colleague regarding future direct contact with that client? Suppose the assignment was one you could do and wanted to do but simply didn't have time to do. Does that change anything? Suppose it was an *established* client instead of a potential new one? Dick Evans ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 10:10:59 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Humor on index-l At 08:57 AM 10/22/96 -0400, Hazel Blumberg-McKee wrote: >Because of the current tense climate on index-l, I attempted to introduce >a tiny note of humor. The note was a response to a posting about someone's >current comfort level with the list. I have definitely learned that (a) my >own comfort level with the list is extremely low at this point; (b) humor >is not allowed on index-l; and (c) I will be unsubscribing, at least for >the time being, so that I do not commit the unpardonable sin of using >humor on this list. Hazel, I am really sorry to hear this. IMO you are one of the most valuable contributors (in the information department, as well as the "lighten up" department) on Index-L, and I really hate that things have come to such a pass that you feel you must leave...even temporarily. I, too, have found myself scanning each of my outgoing messages to be sure it meets some indistinct criterion for not-being-too-funny-or-personal, and it makes me very uncomfortable to have to be constantly reigning in any outburst of silliness and curtailing my normal (fairly bombastic) communication style. Not enough to leave the list, at the moment...but enough to be not very happy with the current situation. We're all busy people; we all look to this list for information and enlightenment. But as Leslie and others have pointed out, many (if not most) of us work in a solo environment and this list is also a way of staying in touch with the outside world. I wish there were a way that we could please the ones who find the humor annoying, while still allowing the rest of us our few chuckles. Somebody had proposed, awhile ago, that we pay more attention to subject lines and in fact adopt some from Copywriting-L that would more carefully characterize the post that follows. This might be a reasonable alternative to losing good people for any reason. =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 12:33:17 CST Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Resent-From: "Presley, Paula" Comments: Originally-From: From: "Presley, Paula" Subject: Please help unsubscribe me! --------------------------- Original Message --------------------------- ACADEMIC.TRUMAN.EDU unable to deliver following mail to recipient(s): 550 Host 'BINGVMB.BITNET' Unknown ** Text of Mail follows ** Received: from ACADEMIC.TRUMAN.EDU by ACADEMIC.TRUMAN.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 6470; Tue, 22 Oct 96 11:56:47 CDT Message-Id: <22OCT96.12888249.0163.MUSIC@ACADEMIC.TRUMAN.EDU> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 11:56:00 CST From: "Presley, Paula" To: Subject: listserv please help! X-Mailer: MUSIC/SP V5.1.0 In-Reply-To: In reply to your message of Tue, 22 Oct 1996 09:35:50 CST To Charlotte, to "postmaster", to "listserve"---to anybody!!! I've tried and tried and tried to unsubscribe...alas it doesn't work! (At one time my email address was AD15%nemomus@academic.nemostate.edu but now it is this one...could that be the problem? My mailbox is overloaded! Thanks anybody, for your help. Paula _____________________________________________________ Paula Presley FAX 816-785-4181 VOICE 816-785-4525 Associate Editor, THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY PRESS Copy/Production Editor, SIXTEENTH CENTURY JOURNAL MC 111-L, TRUMAN STATE UNIVERSITY 100 E. Normal St., Kirksville, MO 63501-4221 email: ppresley@truman.edu _____________________________________________________ Paula Presley FAX 816-785-4181 VOICE 816-785-4525 Associate Editor, THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY PRESS Copy/Production Editor, SIXTEENTH CENTURY JOURNAL MC 111-L, TRUMAN STATE UNIVERSITY 100 E. Normal St., Kirksville, MO 63501-4221 email: ppresley@truman.edu ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 10:40:22 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Carolyn G. Weaver" Subject: Index-L as "Virtual Water Cooler" In-Reply-To: <199610221507.IAA05971@mx5.u.washington.edu> A while back somebody else on this list (can't remember who) also called it a "virtual water cooler". I think that's correct, and that we need to keep the varying perspectives of a broad audience in mind. Recently I personally have gotten a little testy about having my mailbox fill up with sidebars, humor, etc.; but just before sending off an irate flame, I remembered that I was reading in the context of my "day job", where I normally have to cope with 100-150 work-related messages a day, including an increasing number from this listserv, since it's the ONLY one I still read in undigested form. If I were a fulltime indexer working by myself from my home office without the daily interchange of a large office environment, I would undoubtedly use Index-L, AOL, and my other electronic contacts for many of the same purposes now served by coffee breaks, lunch with colleagues, and simple F2F information exchanges on job-related topics. And since I hope to BE in that position one of these days, rather than just moonlighting, I will not begrudge that outlet to others. Be my guest. I know where the 'delete' key is. Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, WA. phone: 206/930-4348 email: cweaver@u.washington.edu CGWeaver@aol.com On Tue, 22 Oct 1996, Elinor Lindheimer wrote: > Think of Index-L as the water cooler as well as the conference room. Does > that help? > > Elinor Lindheimer > elinorl@mcn.org > ================================================================= ======== Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:37:16 +0000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: banden@ATLAS.AXIOM.NET Subject: Re: Non-competition agreements Richard T. Evans wrote: > What are your thoughts/practices on non-competition agreements between you > and your apprentices, subcontractors, and fellow indexers? > > Scenario A > > You take on an apprentice. Eventually, he is ready to solo and starts his > own practice. What are your understandings regarding clients you introduced > him to? Strictly off limits? OK to approach after a waiting period? Speaking from the apprentice's point of view, I take a strictly off limits approach to my mentor's clients. I feel she has spent many years building her clientele and I would not feel comfortable approaching one of her editors directly to solicit business. My mentor and I have some divergent interests. She has occasionally "passed on" a client to me because I am more interested in building clients in that subject area than she is. I did receive one rush job referral from another colleague. I thanked that colleague personally, and will leave it up to the author to contact me again if she so desires. My business has grown every year without a lot of marketing effort on my part. After reading the marketing thread recently I plan to send some letters this fall, while I'm steeped in lots of wonderful indexes, but mainly to publishers that neither my mentor or I have had contact with, to expand my base to those subjects areas that are truly "icing on the cake" for me. Kay Banning ================================================================= ======== Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:46:42 +0000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: banden@ATLAS.AXIOM.NET Subject: Re: You learn the darndest things indexing!!!! Lynn wrote: > > OK, in a slightly more serious vein... We've been getting just a tad bit > humor-impaired here on the Index-L "tree" (Deb's post put it very nicely). > So, I thought that we could have a lighter, yet still indexing-related (by a > bit of a stretch) perennial thread where we post some of the most > off-the-wall, I-didn't-know-that!, trivial and goofy gems (any subject being > fair game) that we come across while indexing. I know I've often wanted to > post these things here, just for grins and giggles. We could use a subject > line (maybe on the order of this one) that will warn those who aren't into > indexable trivia to breeze by these items. > > Now, I'm sure that many of us here are information and trivia junkies and > that it is part of the attraction that indexing holds for us. It's the spice > that leavens the day, opens our eyes on all-nighters, gets us through tomes > that no one else on earth would read, etc. Who knows? Maybe it could > encourage folks reading this list, wondering about whether to get into > indexing, to jump into the field so that they too could become walking fonts > of oddball information. So, how about it, folks? > > Now, if this idea goes down in flames, well, at least I'm wearing my asbestos > 'jammies. ;-D > I love this idea. The humor on this list is a life saver for me, especially on those days when I'm wrestling with deadlines, soccer games and concepts that just won't cooperate! I come from a library background and although one of the things I love about indexing is the solitary, self-determined nature of it, I really miss my people contacts (I'm a recovering reference librarian). I will sorely miss Hazel's comments and the quotes in her signature line. Kay Banning ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 13:53:57 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Shirley Warren Subject: Re: Recorders Reading through several hundred index-l messages after being out of town or out of touch for too long, I ran across an invitation from Carol Robert to "Janet" - (sorry, I wasn't privy to all the names mentioned) to play recorders at the Winston Salem conference. Is there is a general desire to play ensemble music informally at the conference? People keep telling me (a beginner at indexing but not at music) that musical ability seems to run strong in many indexers. It seems like it might be fun to bring along portable instruments and have some sort of semi-organized musical free-for-all at the conference. I have never been to a national conference. Is there room (timewise) for this sort of thing? I, for one, am interested. Recorders seem like a good place to start, being so small. Also, there is a lot of music of varying abilities written for recorders. I have access to a lot of medieval, renaissance, baroque music, which I would be glad to bring along if there seems to be interest. As a beginning indexer and experienced musician I would enjoy doing something at which I feel competent! Hopefully by next spring that will also be the case with indexing. Shirley Warren, shirleywa@ibm.net ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 13:23:18 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Michele Deyoe Subject: Wisconsin Chapter Meeting. The next meeting of the Wisconsin Chapter of the ASI will be: Saturday, November 9, 1996 11:00 am -- 2:00 pm Sequoya Branch Library Meeting Room Midvale Plaza 513 S. Midvale Blvd. Madison, WI. Our topic will be "Tools Indexers Use" Bring a bag lunch -- coffee provided. Please RSVP to Carol Roberts at: Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com by Nov. 1. ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 15:39:12 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Non-competition agreements In a message dated 96-10-22 12:39:24 EDT, Dick wrote: > What are your thoughts/practices on non-competition agreements between you > and your apprentices, subcontractors, and fellow indexers? Dick, What an interesting question! > > Scenario A > > You take on an apprentice. Eventually, he is ready to solo and starts his > own practice. What are your understandings regarding clients you introduced > him to? Strictly off limits? OK to approach after a waiting period? I personally have never apprenticed, nor took one on. However, I think this should in part be based on the client involved. If the client is a large publisher who uses many freelancers and there's plenty of work to go around, I think it would be a wonderful gesture to introduce the apprentice to them so that he or she could be added to their database of vendors. In fact, in signing on with one client, I had to complete a questionaire that asked if I knew of additional indexers they could add to their pool as they were just starting to build up their freelance base. (Come to think of it, your name was one of the ones I supplied. ;-D) Smaller clients who only have enough work to use only the mentor should remain off-limits, IMHO, unless the client needs a project and the mentor is too overloaded to take on the project. However, it is the mentor controlling things here, not the former apprentice. (I'll address this more below.) To prevent misunderstandings, this should be discussed early in the apprentice-mentor relationship. > > > Scenario B > > You have subcontracted work. Same question regarding the subcontractor. I've been in the position of being the subcontractor. I would consider it highly unethical to approach the contractor's client on my own. So, I feel that a written noncompetition agreement is appropriate, especially when you aren't sure of the ethics of the person you've subcontracted too. (Yes, I know that brings up another can of worms--as in, why subcontract to that person in the first place. ;-D) > > > Scenario C > > You have an inquiry from a *new* client to do a book you aren't interested > in or don't feel qualified to do. You give the client the name of a > colleague, who accepts the assignment. What are the obligations of the > colleague regarding future direct contact with that client? I've been in the position of having had work referred to me by other indexers. One obligation that I feel toward the indexer who made the referral (regardless of how long they've had the client) is to ask the publisher, if they later call me directly, if the referring indexer has been offered the project first. I have actually said this flat out to the client before feeling ethically comfortable enough to accept work from them. (They had indeed called the other indexer who was too busy to take on the project. Plus, when they continued to call me to do work for them, I checked with her to make sure that she was still getting work from them. She was.) Another obligation that I feel personally to a referring indexer is to not undercut his or her rates (and thus possibly walk away permanently with their client by underselling them). So, I always ask the referring indexer how much they generally charge that client and never underbid them. (The heck with whether this can be considered price-fixing. As far as I'm concerned, this is an ethical issue.) In referring work to other indexers, I've never asked for a noncompetition agreement. OK, one client has also used the indexer that I referred him to without calling me first. That's OK with me. Perhaps he wanted to try her out a few times or he thought I was still overloaded. Had I lost him altogether to her (which I didn't), I would have chalked it up to his preferring her for one reason or another, because I know her well enough to not suspect that she "stole" him from me. She's also referred goodies to me and I'm not going to begrudge her whatever projects he sends her way. So, a lot of this is based on the quality of relationships between the indexer and client and between the indexers themselves, IMHO. > > Suppose the assignment was one you could do and wanted to do but simply > didn't have time to do. Does that change anything? Suppose it was an > *established* client instead of a potential new one? If the client is an established client who you know really likes your work and with whom you've formed a strong relationship, I don't think you have much to worry about. If the client is a potential new one, you're quite likely to lose them to the other indexer because it will be with the new indexer that the relationship is actually forged, not with you. (Now, if the indexer really bombs out, then they may call you again.) I don't think a noncompetition agreement with the other indexer can have the desired effect of forcing the client to work with you if you haven't yet established a relationship of any sort with the potential client. They could simply call yet another indexer if the indexer tells them of the noncompetition agreement he or she has with you. So, again, this mainly depends on the ethics of the indexer you referred the client to. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 15:39:07 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Humor on index-l In a message dated 96-10-22 12:33:16 EDT, Hazel wrote: > Because of the current tense climate on index-l, I attempted to introduce > a tiny note of humor. The note was a response to a posting about someone's > current comfort level with the list. I have definitely learned that (a) my > own comfort level with the list is extremely low at this point; (b) humor > is not allowed on index-l; and (c) I will be unsubscribing, at least for > the time being, so that I do not commit the unpardonable sin of using > humor on this list. Hazel, I'm cc'ing you on this message to make sure you get it (if you've already unsubscribed). PLEASE DON'T LEAVE US!!!!!!!! Regardless of what you post, whether it is strictly professional info about indexing or something in a much lighter vein, your posts are among the best here. Now, let's take your strictly professional posts... I find your perspective extremely valuable and I'm sure I'm not the only one here that does so. I absolutely love your messages and the thought of reading our threads here without the leavening of your insights truly depresses me!! Your occasional posts that are in a lighter vein are also just as much appreciated, at least here in this corner. I'm posting this to the list because I want everyone to know just how upset I am that we've lost (even if only temporarily) a wonderful member of our community because of a bit of static here. I'm not saying that to flame anyone at all, BTW, having generated a bit of static here myself (for other reasons). However, just as in any other community, there are going to be disagreements here about all types of things and some of them will be more heated than others. Sometimes we'll even step on each others' toes, but that's to be expected whenever you have a crowd of 800+ people, IMHO. With regard to this issue, humor, some folks will consider a post totally devoted to it as noise, while others (like myself) will chuckle. That's OK. I would hope that there would be room for both types and more here on the list. We truly need the wide range of personalities and perspectives we bring to the list if it is to continue to have a useful dynamic. If we all felt the same about everything, we'd just become a navel contemplation society and finally bore each other to death. Now, about the humor thing. It shouldn't even be a question as to whether humor is "allowed" on Index-L. I do understand the ongoing concern with maintaining a decent signal-to-noise ratio on the list, having unsubscribed from lists and newsgroups myself because they were too noisy. However, all of the back and forth about Hazel's one pajama message, if it is to be considered "noise" (in that it is non-indexing related), is also "noise" (this message included). It's very similar to the situation we had a few months back where there was a bad address among the list subscribers and we kept getting undelivered mail notices whenever we posted something, so we started posting about the notices themselves which generated even more notices and on and on... until poor Charlotte asked us to please stop (becoming overwhelmed on her end as moderator). The same thing with spams. One spam message here generates a spate of messages complaining about the spam, thus magnifying the problem way beyond what it originally was. So what's my point (finally)? Can we all compromise on this? Can we keep the majority of messages to index-related issues (though I know at times we have to deal with these list management-oriented and process-observation issues as well)? And if someone posts the occasional off-topic thing, like my earlier post this morning about the flame-pajama-indexing cookbook subject line, that those who enjoy it chuckle and those who don't just delete it. And those of us who occasionally post things like that should promise to exercise some restraint (as I feel we've always done in the past) and not overdo it. Hazel didn't post messages like that every day or even weekly. And the majority of my own messages are on-topic as well (I think ;-D). Utopia isn't an option here or anywhere, IMHO, but tolerance on all sides will go a long way. Hazel, please come back!!!! Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 16:22:01 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: GVHatch@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Non-competition agreements Dick, I don't have a lot of experience with your three scenarios, but I do have a comment on A. I have worked as an apprentice/subcontractor for another indexer for about 2 years now. Speaking strictly from my point of view, I view her clients as strictly off-limits to me. I might get permission to use them as references and I might still subcontract work from her for them, but I will not approach them directly myself. The only exception would be if I knew that they had an overload of work and my accepting jobs was not going to take work away from her. I just wouldn't feel right "biting the hand" that helped me discover this field in the first place. Just my .02. Gaylene Hatch ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 16:22:04 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: GVHatch@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Flames, pajamas, and Indexing cookbooks In case people are still feeling unprofessional about all of the humor on Index-L, I felt I needed to insert this. My husband is a CPA at a large accounting firm. He works with many large companies in numerous industries. The amount of jokes and personal comments sent on e-mail and message boards among these people is immense! He forwards on to me his favorites and I manage to get at least 3 or 4 a day. He claims I only get about one-tenth of what he receives. Everyone needs time to let loose and laugh a little. In fact, it seems to bring people closer together. What I have loved about indexing from the start is the friendliness and helpfulness of the people that I have met. I admit to letting my fingers fly a little too freely a couple of times in the past. (It's not good to type with only 4 hours of sleep over 2 days. :-)) It's human nature, but we're now coming to the oversensitivity side of things. I loved Lynn's idea about having a name for postings about funny, trivial, or just plain weird pieces of information. I, for one, will read all of them and laugh out loud sitting all alone in my house with my neighbors wondering if I've cracked.;-D I certainly hope that we won't lose Hazel from this list as I have often made an effort to read her posts. She has had many interesting things to say and I enjoy the humor that she occasionally sticks in. Well, just my opinion FWIW. Gaylene Hatch ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 16:48:43 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: AMHoward@AOL.COM Subject: Page Ranges In a previous message to the list, someone (sorry, I don't remember who) gave as an indication of a bad index the fact that the index gave only the first page of a discussion that spanned several pages, rather than giving the entire page range. For example, if there was a discussion on the ABC module that spanned pages 14-20, the index specified only: ABC module, 14 instead of: ABC module, 14-20 I admit that I have done this in several indexes I have written, but not without reason. I'd like your opinions on whether you think this practice always indicates a bad index or whether you think there is some gray area here. I can take it if you all disagree; I'm here to learn, after all. O.k., here are my reasons. All of the indexes I write are embedded indexes in FrameMaker. To create such a page range in an index entry, I would either have to embed an index tag on every one of the pages, or I would have to create one index tag on the first page with a special code marking it as the beginning of a range and another index tag on the last page with a code marking it as the end of the range. I'm aware, however, that difficulty is not a good reason in and of itself. As justification (in my own mind, at least) that this is o.k., I use the fact that all of my indexes are very detailed and very well analyzed. The books I index are software manuals and are often very modular in design. For example, the command line is really only discussed on pages 3 - 6. Therefore, when I create an entry resulting in: Command line, 3 I don't feel I'm creating any confusion on where the main discussion is, because that's the only discussion. There are no space limitations on my indexes, and so my clients would rather see everything analyzed so that there are no more than 2 or 3 locators per index entry. Readers can find the exact piece of information almost immediately, since main entries are often broken down into subheadings with only 1 or 2 locators for the most part. I remember reading in several places that this is considered over-analyzing, and that subheadings with only 1 locator should be pulled up to the main heading. But, is that a general rule, or does it apply mostly to traditional book publishing where space is more of a consideration? Other than space, I can't think of why subheadings with only 1 locator would be a disadvantage. Looking forward to a lively discussion....! Angela Howard AMHoward@aol.com ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 19:03:12 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Julia B. Marshall" Subject: Re: Opera Titles In-Reply-To: <199610212202.SAA20639@cap1.CapAccess.org> On Mon, 21 Oct 1996, John Sampson wrote: > > Adagio, _Oboe Concerto in C minor_ (Marcello) > > Would you put 'Adagio' as an entry term? I would have thought there were > too many pieces of classical music with an adagio movement to make this > specific enough. > > _John Sampson_ > Dear John I would seriously question but not reject the need to use the word "Adagio" at all. It is one movement within the larger work _Oboe Concerto in C Minor_. If you do feel that it is necessary to cite the individual movement, it is much more acceptable to list the title of the work first rather than the individual movement. Thus _Oboe Concerto in C Minor_, Adagio (Marcello), ## I would also definitely include a cross reference at "Marcello" as well. Hope this helps. Regards Julia Marshall juliam@capaccess.org ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 17:22:09 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Barbara Ping Subject: Re: Humor on index-l To Hazel and every indexer who has a sense of humor, I am a lurker and an indexer wanna be. I am finding this list to be very valuable and I was enjoying it until everyone started getting all upset. I just wanted to say to Hazel - please don't unsubscribe from the list - I enjoy and need your humor. If people can't handle humor, let them use the delete key - that's what it's for. This list is a community of all types of people - that's what makes it valuable and dynamic. Don't give in to the controllers who want everything their way. Take care and thanks for the humor, Barbara Ping eb61061@goodnet.com Hazel wrote: >Because of the current tense climate on index-l, I attempted to introduce >a tiny note of humor. The note was a response to a posting about someone's >current comfort level with the list. I have definitely learned that (a) my >own comfort level with the list is extremely low at this point; (b) humor >is not allowed on index-l; and (c) I will be unsubscribing, at least for >the time being, so that I do not commit the unpardonable sin of using >humor on this list. > >Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) > > ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:24:28 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DStaub11@AOL.COM Subject: Re: vocab words Well, now that I've read this whole discussion, I'm wondering if I might change policies and use the solution Lynn is adopting--glossary terms as separate entries with (glossary term) (or whatever) after them, and my beautiful index structure designed by me going cheerfully on in spite of them. I think I'll try this on the next editor with whom this situation arises. Love how I always learn something on here! And Lynn, LOL re the gnome on steroids (raging through marking up terms for the glossary at random)!! That's exactly how it seems sometimes! At least these days I feel confident to argue politely but firmly about it with editors... I do sympathize with people trying to keep extra clutter out of their mailboxes, but I also experience this list as a community of people doing the same (very isolated) work that I do, and occasional pajama comments feel fine to me. Maybe we can try to include them in our next post that includes indexing substance? Do Mi ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:42:00 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Parrish Subject: Re: business names Oh dear! What have I done?? Lynn Moncrief writes to Jan Wright: "BTW, you're so lucky to have one of those cool last names that you can incorporate into your business name like that. ;-D There was a guy here on the list (I haven't seen him post anything in a while) with the last name of Master and his business was Master Indexing (or something like that). Another supercool last name/business name like yours." And without worrying at all about plays on words, I have been calling my new indexing business "Parrish Professional Indexing"! Definitely not cool. Parrish Professional Indexing is, at least until I run out of brochures and can change it, a subdivision of my broader business, The Ethical Ghost: Editorial Services. Worried now-- Ann Parrish ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 21:42:27 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Parrish Subject: Re: Flames, pajamas, and Indexing cookbooks Reflections on the recent skirmish-- It does seem to me that most truly professional people in most professions wear their professions comfortably and without self-consciousness. They are professionals in black three-piece suits or in pajamas. And have wisdom and humor ever been strangers to each other? Since I started lurking on this list (scurrying along the wainscoting, as someone put it), I have learned from and chuckled with many of you. I am sure the majority on the list feel as I do and would not want this to change. I vote for peace and good humor. Ann Parrish Parrish Professional Indexing The Ethical Ghost: Editorial Services ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 18:43:55 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Victoria Baker Subject: Re: Humor + comfort levels on Index-l I came back from two days away to an apparent flame war over pajama-references. At least, that's how it looked according to the subject lines in the in-box. I share Richard E.'s sense of irony that this erupted over a thread that was embedded in a concern for "comfort level" on the list. One thing about humor is that not everybody's sense of humor is the same. For instance, Cynthia B. twice posted her support for Joyce N.'s request to cut out the "(however cute)" personal messages. The second time it was posted with a humorous reference to the fact that she had misspelled a word in the first post. Otherwise, the two posts were identical, but I didn't know that, so scrolled through thinking she was adding something. This is only meant to point out that Cynthia's exercise of humor involved just as much time for me to discover it as had Hazel's pajama note. I think that life would not be possible without humor, that as humans we vary a lot Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 20:44:42 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9610D" To: Julius Ariail in what strikes us as worth sharing, and that part of interacting with people (for that _is_ what we're doing here, yes?) is getting their individual humor as well. For my part, I have been extremely careful in what I post ever since I was responsible for a sarcastic post about a month ago that upset the list. I don't want to contribute to an atmosphere of discomfort--I think the list is far too precious to risk--and hope that I am not. If I have continued to contribute to the discomfort that led Ann N. to express her concerns, I would like to know. I hope that individuals who continue to contribute to discomfort would be open to direct (private) feedback on this matter, and that people will communicate these concerns, as they did with me when I was at fault. What was said to me at the time of my upsetting post was that if I disagreed with someone I should take it offlist. Obviously people present opposing opinions on the list, but I took it to mean that I shouldn't get into the personality stuff on the list, and being really new, I've worked hard to honor that. I would like to see that be extended to everyone on the list--there have been some very personal responses onlist of late, taking someone to task because of their mode of expression, that have upset me as well. ================================================================= ======== Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:45:47 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Page Ranges At 04:48 PM 10/22/96 -0400, AMHoward@AOL.COM wrote: >In a previous message to the list, someone (sorry, I don't remember who) >gave as an indication of a bad index the fact that the index gave only the >first page of a discussion that spanned several pages, rather than giving >the entire page range. I'm not real familiar with embedded indexes, so I can't say whether they constitute a separate category that ought to operate under different rules. But IMO both page numbers ought to be included--a page range ought to be given--in any standard sort of index. >Readers can find the exact piece of information almost immediately, since main entries are often broken down into subheadings with only 1 or 2 locators for the most part. I remember reading in several places that this is considered over-analyzing, and that subheadings with only 1 locator should be pulled up to the main heading. But, is that a general rule, or does it apply mostly to traditional book publishing where space is more of a consideration? Other than space, I can't think of why subheadings with only 1 locator would be a disadvantage. When it is humanly possible, I prefer to "overanalyze" rather than drag every possible entry up to the main and delete subs. Even if that leaves me with several one-page subentries, this is usually preferable (IMO of course_ to a string of unanalyzed pages tacked on to the main entry. In some cases, that one page indicates a substantive, lengthy discussion of something and not just a passing mention. (If it =were= just a few words, I would probably have not made a subentry in the first place). One problem with this approach, particularly when dealing with sub-subs, is ending up with only one sub-sub under a sub...or having only one sub under a main entry. I don't like the way this looks, and will sometimes rework the entry string to avoid it. But I think I may be nit-picking there. =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 05:31:55 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Flames, pajamas, and Indexing cookbooks Ann Parrish wrote: << I vote for peace and good humor. >> To which I say, "amen." I wish we would all remember those qualities that we free-lancers all had to learn and to use use in our "previous" lives when we had a water-cooler or an office coffee machine to cluster around -- toleration, good humor, looking the other way sometimes. It's a shame to have such ill-will on this list lately. We are all professionals, no matter what our sense of humor. It goes without saying that we won't all agree all the time, even as to sense of humor or what we'd like to see posted. But can't we sometimes agree to disagree. Some people probably did boo-boo. Maybe some used not the best of judgement. Can't we simply let it go and get on with it? I really feel we are picking this issue to death. Hoping for good will, camaraderie, and judicious use of the "delete" button when all else fails. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 06:41:32 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wlively@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Humor on index-l At various times in my life I've been associated with various freelance groups, i.e. sign language interpreters, indexers, etc. I've noticed within groups such as these a decided tendency to "take ourselves so serious" that there is no place for humor. After all we we laugh and have fun the "serious" business of signing, indexing, etc. will suffer. Now, don't get me wrong, making is living is a serious business .... but also often it is also a business filled with humor. Laughing at oneself and with others is certainly much more emotionally satisfying, and healthy, than being SERIOUS and angry. LOL ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:19:06 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: FrameMaker technique (was: Re: Page Ranges) In a message dated 96-10-22 23:26:55 EDT, Angela wrote: > In a previous message to the list, someone (sorry, I don't remember who) gave > as an indication of a bad index the fact that the index gave only the first > page of a discussion that spanned several pages, rather than giving the > entire page range. > I admit that I have done this in several indexes I have written, but not > without reason. I'd like your opinions on whether you think this practice > always indicates a bad index or whether you think there is some gray area > here. I can take it if you all disagree; I'm here to learn, after all. Angela, I don't think that using a single locator instead of a page range is at all user-friendly. A page range can indicate where a subject is discussed in more depth and instantly direct the reader there. (Sometimes the indication may be a false one where the page range spans only two consecutive pages and exists only because a rather short paragraph on the bottom of one page is continued on the next.) This becomes even more important for the reader if the locators for the entry are unanalyzed, IMHO. > > O.k., here are my reasons. All of the indexes I write are embedded indexes > in FrameMaker. To create such a page range in an index entry, I would > either > have to embed an index tag on every one of the pages, or I would have to > create one index tag on the first page with a special code marking it as the > beginning of a range and another index tag on the last page with a code > marking it as the end of the range. I'm aware, however, that difficulty is > not a good reason in and of itself. I understand how creating page ranges in FrameMaker can be a hassle, but here's how I do it without a lot of a lot of blood, sweat and tears. Create your marker for the start of the range. Before pressing Enter to embed the entry, highlight the entire text of the entry and copy it to the Clipboard using Ctrl+C. (These key combinations are way faster than using the mouse and Edit menu.) Home the cursor to the beginning of the marker text and type in <$startrange>. Note that you define and copy the index entry text for typing in the <$startrange> building block. (BTW, highlighting the text is way easier to do in version 5 because the marker box shows all of it, whereas in version 4, scrolling through the text in the marker box to highlight it all was a real pain. This can be done quickly, BTW, by using Shift+End or Home instead of dragging with the mouse.) Scroll the document to where you want your endrange marker, specifying the end of the page range. (Sometimes, using that little page down arrow on the status bar will get you to the page much faster.) With the cursor in the index entry marker box, type Ctrl+V to paste in the text you copied in the startrange marker. Home the cursor to beginning of the line and type in <$endrange>. In addition to avoiding having to retype the marker text, this technique ensures that you won't have a typo or an extra space that will prevent FrameMaker from merging both of the markers when you generate the index. (You know, those ugly page number-?? thingies that make editing the index such a bear.) Now, when you created your endrange marker, you're probably at a point in the document where you don't want to be because you want to embed other entries before the location of the endrange marker or double-post the entry for the page range. At any rate, you'll often want to get back to where the startrange marker is. To do this easily, I keep the Find/Change box open on the screen at all times with it set to search on index marker text. So, it's an easy matter to simply click in the F/C box (with it set to search backwards) to get back to the location of the startrange marker. Of course, your screen will be rather cluttered with both the F/C and Index Entry Marker boxes open at all times. So, before I start embedding, I move the boxes around by dragging them on their title bars so that as much document text is displayed between them as possible. I also set the magnification of the text to 80% so that it is still readable, yet more lines are displayed on the screen between the marker boxes. (It also helps to have a 17-monitor like I do, bought specifically for this purpose. ;-D) You may end up obscuring the menu bar with one of the dialog boxes in this quest to display as many lines of the document at one time. To solve this problem, I use the Alt+ (underlined letter in menu name) combinations to open a menu when I need to. (Yes, this means memorizing them. ;-D) I hope this helps make the process of creating page ranges easy enough to where you're more likely to create them when needed. If anything here is unclear, please drop me a line offlist and I'll try to help. I'll address the issue of over-analyzing in a separate post to keep this one from becoming overly long. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:19:08 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Page Ranges In a message dated 96-10-22 23:26:55 EDT, Angela wrote: > I don't feel I'm creating any confusion on where the main discussion is, > because that's the only discussion. There are no space limitations on my > indexes, and so > my clients would rather see everything analyzed so that there are no more > than 2 or 3 locators per index entry. Readers can find the exact piece of > information almost immediately, since main entries are often broken down > into > subheadings with only 1 or 2 locators for the most part. I remember reading > in several places that this is considered over-analyzing, and that > subheadings with only 1 locator should be pulled up to the main heading. > But, is that a general rule, or does it apply mostly to traditional book > publishing where space is more of a consideration? Other than space, I can' > t > think of why subheadings with only 1 locator would be a disadvantage. > > Looking forward to a lively discussion....! Angela, OK, here's your lively discussion. ;-D First of all, I totally agree with you and you've given me a chance to express one of my pet peeves with indexes! Why not analyze when space is not an issue? I don't understand that concept either where folks claim that having subentries with only one or two locators is over-analysis. IMHO, the goal of any index is to get the reader to where they want to go with the least amount of effort on their part. Unanalyzed locators can lead to false drops, wasting the user's time. Get them to wherever they want to go the first time, whenever possible, is my philosophy. I honestly do not understand the opinion that it is OK for the reader to have to dilly-dally around in the index trying one locator and then another before finding what they want. And, when you take into account that nowadays with television and its rapid-fire display of images has led to a large part of the population having the attention span of a gnat, this becomes even more imperative. Not only is this important in all books, but with computer manuals and other types of references this issue becomes even more critical. I wish I could remember who it was that said that, when a software user has to refer to a manual, they are already mad. I believe that is indeed true. I only read software manuals when I'm paid to read them (index them) or when I'm using software myself. And I am one of those many software users who will mess around with software, trying to figure out how to get it to do a certain thing for quite a while before I dig out the manual (by which time I'm already boiling because, in an ideal world, the software should be designed so that I don't have to often resort to the manual). Software users and folks resorting to other types of references are most often doing so only because they are trying to perform a specific task. It is the task that is uppermost in their minds, not taking a pleasure-cruise through the book. In fact, they could easily be under time-constraints in trying to perform a given task. So, why compound the user's frustration by bouncing them from pillar to post between the manual and index unnecessarily? There are few situations where I do not analyze and they are all either in the realm of trade-offs due to circumstances beyond the indexer's control or driven by usability issues from the user's perspective. a) space is limited b) you're already down to the lowest level of analysis permitted by the client c) the concept is essentially identical at multiple instances in the text and no user-benefit will be obtained by analyzing it further (or it's downright impossible to analyze it further) d) further analysis would create an overly complex index for the type of text being indexed and the type of audience the book was created for e) further analysis would create readability problems in the index because of excessive rollovers (however, this usually doesn't occur unless you're already down to the subsub level or the index is printed three or more columns across) f) further analysis would create an orphaned, single subentry (at whatever level). That, IMHO, is true over-analysis. (If it is important to have the modifying information represented by the orphan, I tack it onto the next higher level after a comma or reword the higher level entry.) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:52:33 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jim Mancall Subject: Re: Opera Titles In-Reply-To: <9610230737.AA24112@is.nyu.edu> Just a quick note of thanks to everyone who responded to my opera titles query. The index is off to the publisher and all the better for your help. Thanks again, Jim Mancall ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:56:22 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Page Ranges In a message dated 96-10-22 23:26:44 EDT, Angela wrote: << In a previous message to the list, someone (sorry, I don't remember who) gave as an indication of a bad index the fact that the index gave only the first page of a discussion that spanned several pages, rather than giving the entire page range. ... I'd like your opinions on whether you think this practice always indicates a bad index or whether you think there is some gray area here. >> Angela, A common practice in back-of-the-journal indexes, where entries are referenced to articles, is to provide only the first page of the article discussion. I do well over a dozen journal volume indexes every year, and, per publisher and client specifications, this is our practice. (I don't know how this got started, perhaps to save space.) For example, one of the entries for an article which begins on p 1591 is as follows: Bronchiolar papillary tumors progression to lung adenocarcinoma, 1591 While this isn't my practice in back-of-the-book indexes, it does help keep one's perspective on things. fair winds and happy indexing all, Pilar Wyman Indexing Annapolis, MD Tel/Fax: 410-263-7537 Email: PilarW@aol.com ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:58:48 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Re: Page Ranges At 08:45 PM 10/22/96 -0700,Sonsie wrote > >I'm not real familiar with embedded indexes, so I can't say whether they >constitute a separate category that ought to operate under different rules. MS-Word index tags only reference the first page. In order to reference a range you have to create a bookmark that spans the range then create an index entry pointing to the bookmark. It's a pain and I can see why one might bypass the extra work and settle for single-page references. I can see why, but I don't condone the practice. This is one of the reasons I consider embedded indexing tools inferior to standalone tools like CINDEX and Macrex. Dick Evans ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 07:57:59 CDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lonergan Lynn Subject: Re: Flames, pajamas, and Indexing cookbooks I, too, was castigated because of my first post to the list. I apologized to the parties involved and have since replied only to individuals. I index military and aerospace periodicals which are not widely known for including humor and often deal with war, political strife, airplane crashes and other topics of similar seriosity :-). There is a difference between taking one's work seriously--which I feel we all do--and taking one's self seriously. I hope others on this list do not have extra-professional lives as joyless as mine right now. Sitting here in "office attire" as I write, I envy those who can work in their PJs and am always glad to see a bit of levity, especially while proofing 130 pages of periodical citations. I'd like to have Hazel back--as one cat lover to another--and would like to see the list continue to take indexing, but not necessarily indexers, seriously ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lynn A. Lonergan Assistant Editor/Librarian Air University Library Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6424 334-953-2504; fax 334-953-1192 llonergan@max1.au.af.mil ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 09:28:37 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: business names In a message dated 96-10-23 04:35:45 EDT, Ann wrote: > Oh dear! What have I done?? Ann, Eeek! The question should be "what have *I* done" by posting that little tongue-in-cheek aside about cool last names-business names. ;-D Are you concerned that Parrish Professional Indexing, when said over the phone, may sound too parochial or is confined only to certain locations in Louisiana? ;-D Actually, I really like the alliteration and rhythm of Parrish Professional Indexing!!! Plus that double "P" could lend itself to a supercool logo in the hands of the right artist. BTW, I also love "The Ethical Ghost" for your broader business (ghostwriting?)!!! Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:08:24 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rachel Rice Subject: thanks, more stuff Well, I for one would not want to read this or any list that was devoid of humor and that never inserted the slightest personal remark. I welcome all the little bits and pieces of all your personalities that you let me peek at. On another note, thanks to all who gave advice regarding mistakes after the fact. Even though the consensus was to call the publisher, I decided not to for several reasons, one being that I have another job due like last year, and didn't want to take the time to fix it, especially as it will never be noticed, and because it wasn't a big enough problem to make waves over. If it had been, I would most certainly have taken your advices, and used your words. If such a thing happens in future, that's how I'll handle it. Another thing. I'm now calling myself (to you, not to clients) an advanced beginner. Now that I've progressed to that level I'm finding out how much I don't know. I see how you all do things and I realize all the mistakes I made in my first indexes (cringing over them). I guess I'm saying I'm sort of having a Crisis of Confidence. I've read the books, read the list, gone to conferences, and I still don't know that I'm producing even adequate work. I go through the checklist provided by ASI, but it doesn't tell me if I've made some stupid editing error, or if I missed an indexable term on a page, or left out an important concept, etc. How are other beginner-advanced beginner people handling this? RR Rachel Rice Directions Unlimited Desktop Services Chilmark, Mass. rachelr@tiac.net; http://www.tiac.net/users/rachelr/ ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:10:56 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Joyce Nester Subject: humor flame (kind of long) OK, backup! Please!! My post, which started this firestorm, was one of several recently requesting people to keep PERSONAL posts off the list. As much as I hate having to defend myself, I must.**Humor was not the object of my post.** No one of you enjoys humor more than I do. The friendly tone of the list is great and the information shared just incredible. However, what I actually said in my post (a plea for limitations on personal messages, and quite polite, too, if I do say so) has been blown completely out of proportion. Please, before you flame someone, please give them as much consideration as you give to the person you perceive to have been attacked. Such a hot, long-lasting flame over an simple request that netiquette be observed is quite alarming. In fact, this flame is a perfect example of *why* netiquette requires that personal messages be posted directly to the intended; inevitably someone gets offended and there are hard feelings. As for the origninal problem, humor and personal posts are two quite different animals. While some of you are lucky enough to work at home, some of us are on this list only because our employers allow us the time to learn. It seems that those folks who quite understandably want more intimate cyber-company could enjoy it more by developing personal relationships, thus keeping down traffic on the list and being under even less restraint over what their posts contain. Even the addition of CHAT to the subject heading would be helpful. This is a convention on most lists and suggesting it's use should in no way be considered a personal insult. Speaking of traffic; my one post has generated an amazing number of posts many of which instructed me that I was generating list traffic. Ironic? ;-} As for the resignation of Hazel ... she and I posted a couple of times privately. She assured me that she was not upset with me, to my great relief. There was no talk of "unpardonable sins" or anything even remotely like that. I have no reason to believe that I am the "bad guy" who prompted her to leave the list. I still have the posts if anyone *still* thinks I am evil incarnate. I am always sorry to see anyone leave a list in an unhappy way. I was also sorry to see an editor leave the list and wonder if this flap had anything to do with her exit? Anyway, if anyone else still wants to flame me, please post me personally (also a point of netiquette). I promise not to cyber-bite your head off. Maybe we can even promote a little of the tolerance and understanding to which so many of you have alluded. ;-> Peace and love (really!!) Joyce Nester nester @vt.edu ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 11:50:58 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Julia B. Marshall" Subject: Re: Humor on index-l In-Reply-To: <199610230935.FAA28184@cap1.CapAccess.org> Dear Index-ler's Just my .02 on this issue. One of the blessings/curses of e-mail is it's immediacy. Everyone can post a message in a few seconds. This can be a wonderful way to communicate. It can also compound, ironically enough problems with communication. This humor business is a perfect example of this. Perhaps everyone needs to remember that this Listserv serves hundreds of people. If you post a reply no matter what it is (humor, complaints, flames, advice, information etc) it will be broadcast to hundreds of people. IMHO it would be wise for everyone to ask before hitting the reply button "Is this something that would be OK for hundreds of people to read?" The issue also swings the other way. Just because you don't personally appreciate someone's humor, replies on old threads that you're tired of, complaints, chat etc. does *not* mean someone else(and there are hundreds of us out here) won't appreciate either. I'll stick my oar in and say that I enjoy the humor. It brings a certain amount of fun to my day. If I find postings that I don't like or are of no interest to me, well my delete key works real well in those instances. Regards Julia Marshall juliam@capaccess.org ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 12:03:33 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: WordenDex@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Business names To try a clarification on yesterday's post about generic vs particular names, without criticising anyone, here goes: Kleenez and Xerox may mean facial tissues and photocopies to people not wearing corporate lawyer hats. It is understandable that these companies want to protect their proprietary names from other manufacturers of similar products, especially when those products from other companies are inferior. They want to establish a quality level synonymous with their own name brands. Indexing Services, without a particular designator like Poobah Indexing Services or Indexing Services by Poobah, is a generic name that an association like ASI might use to establish a level of quality synonymous with professional results. Individual businesses certainly would want to incorporate it into their names to stir recognition of the idea in potential customers of what professional means and to associate that meaning with their own particular company and its product. Using Indexing Services in a tag line after a unique business name is OK and very appropriate, e.g., Poobah PrePublication Inc., Your Source of Editing and Indexing Services. A tag line is not a generic name; it only describes a class of tasks offered by a company to its customers. As someone else on Index-L tags, that's my two cents. Diane Worden, Kalamazoo, Mich. ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 12:26:57 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Page Ranges In a message dated 96-10-22 23:26:55 EDT, Angela writes: > As justification (in my own mind, at least) that this is o.k., I use the fact > that all of my indexes are very detailed and very well analyzed. The books > I index are software manuals and are often very modular in design. For > example, the command line is really only discussed on pages 3 - 6. > Therefore, when I create an entry resulting in: > > Command line, 3 > Interesting questions, and I think they raise issues that we need more usability studies to figure out impacts of indexing decisions! As an index user, I often use the existence of a page range in an entry as a clue that that is where the most important meat of the discussion is. If I have: 2, 79, 200-205, 300 to choose from, I will go straight to the 200-205 section first. If presented with subentries for each of these, it negates the clue of the 200-205, but increases the amount I have to look through to find the significant entry. I would have to think about which way I would prefer to have it, though.... jump to a page range without much clue as to what is there, or read through a list of subentries? The index would have to be significantly longer, wouldn't it? I find in online indexing when limited by tool constraints to a one-to-one entry-to-locator style, the index is a lot more detailed than I think it needs to be, and that users get very tired of searching it. But that's just my opinion and that's also online, a different search environment. If the books are very modular, and the material only appears on 200-205, perhaps p. 200 by itself would be okay as an index entry. Most of the books I do aren't that modular, even the two-page-spread-oriented-modular ones I get, and I figure the page ranging is important to the user. I like having it as a user - so I figure they do too. The second feature of the page range is the indication of how much material is there relative to the book itself - picture a user picking up a book in a store, thinking of buying it, looks to see if it has a good section on the Oboe, and finds p. 300. What do they think? No idea if it is 300-301, or 300-350. Depth isn't indicated. Do users mind not having that depth indicator, and do multiple subentries make up for it? I don't know - do they take the time to analyse it, or do they go straight to the page and look there? Wouldn't it be interesting to take the same book, index it both ways, and see which one a user would want to use, or if they even notice at all? I too particularly hate embedding page-range entries, and my experience in Frame is they can break. In PageMaker it is also horrid nasty stuff to do, but slightly less so than Frame - less coding work. I do note a tendency in myself to not want to page range because of the horridness. Sighing loudly when I have to go back in and add or edit one. I usually write the index outside of the tool, and then embed it, so that I have the page ranging figured out before it gets coded and the editing done as well. Perhaps this can be a trade off point when clients insist on embedded indexing, and insist on short turn-around times. No page ranging! Jan Wright ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:22:56 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Carolyn G. Weaver" Subject: Re: Page Ranges In-Reply-To: <199610230605.XAA17469@mx5.u.washington.edu> The locator style used by an indexer in a given index does not (necessarily) reflect the indexer's preferred style or practices. I've had clients who dictate "first page only" for multi-page references. And I'm currently doing an index for a new client (major publisher) with very strict locator rules: provide comprehensive locators for each chapter and each subsection, in addition to analysis of the material in the section, e.g.: Heart attack, 150-160 diagnosis, 150-153 radiography, 150-151 stress tests, 151-153 drug therapy, 154-157 surgery, 157-160 heart bypass, 158 etc.... My customary style is to omit the broad locators when all pages within the topic are covered by the subheads; but for this client I do it Her Way. Neither style is wrong; it's what is needed to satisfy the client. And before we start another "indent or not to indent" thread, this is an illustration only; it's not a "real" index. Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, WA. phone: 206/930-4348 email: cweaver@u.washington.edu or CGWeaver@aol.com ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:26:21 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Indexing with Word 7 I've had some inquiries about creating indexes in Word. The built in indexing features are pretty pitiful, but I did try one small project by creating the index in CINDEX and paying someone to just type the corresponding tags into Word. Since then, I've been playing around with writing some macros that might make actual index creation more efficient. To that end, I bought a book called "Introduction to WordBasic Programming:, ISBN 1-874416-82-6. Lo and behold, it already had some indexing macros in it. I haven't tried them yet, but they sound promising. Basically, they work like this: 1. Using the Word 7 highlighting feature, scan your document and highlight words and phrases just as you would with a highlighting pen on hard copy. 2. When everything is highlighted, run a macro to scan the document and create a concordance from the highlighted items. 3. Edit the concordance and tell Word what index entries you want to create from each word or phrase. 4. Run another macro to generate the index. 5. Review the resulting index, revise and repeat steps 1-4 as required. (This only applies to Word 7 because earlier versions do not have a highlighting feature.) Has anyone used this or similar techniques? Care to compare notes? Use e-mail if this is not of interest to the list. Dick Evans ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:48:37 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Arizona Indexing Workshops Southwest Indexers! --- 2 very excellent full-day workshops are coming up 11/15 and 11/16 in Phoenix. On Friday, Nov. 15th, Lathrop Media Services is presenting "Indexing Skills Workshop for Technical Communicators" at the Holiday Inn, Mesa, AZ. Cost of the workshop is $125, and includes a 72-page Participant's Workbook. Lori Lathrop is the presenter. This workshop is aimed at technical writers and will enable them to develop clear, concise, and useful indexes for both hardcopy and online documentation. On Saturday, Nov. 16th, Lori Lathrop will do a full-day workshop for all indexers, new and experienced, technical and non-technical. "Editing an Index for Quality and Usability" is sponsored by the Arizona Chapter (chapter status in process) of the American Society of Indexers at Arizona State University's Memorial Union. Cost for this workshop is $50 for ASI members, $60 for non-members before 11/9. This workshop features a lot of work in groups evaluating indexes, and hands-on exercises are provided. It will serve as an excellent follow-up to the Friday technical communicators' workshop and will provide more hands-on experience in evaluating and editing indexes. Registration materials for both workshops are available from Janet Perlman at jperlman@aol.com or call (602) 569-7302. ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 12:05:05 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Page Ranges At 08:19 AM 10/23/96 -0400, Wildefire@AOL.COM wrote: >f) further analysis would create an orphaned, single subentry (at whatever >level). That, IMHO, is true over-analysis. (If it is important to have the >modifying information represented by the orphan, I tack it onto the next >higher level after a comma or reword the higher level entry.) I try to do the same thing you describe above. My question, though, is WHY do we think this is "over-analysis" and why we feel we need to rewrite the entries so as to eliminate this "orphan"? I've come across two such instances in the book I'm currently working on. While I still vastly prefer more than one subentry in a group, I'm becoming willing to leave that "orphan" just where it is. After all, the author made a point of separating out this particular issue...the only separate head under the main head in the text...and so he must think it's worthy of some extra attention. Not only am I leaving that "orphan," but it's getting its very own main entry as well. It still bothers me, appearance-wise, but I can't say why it should...except that "we've always done it that way." Any ideas as to why this should feel so wrong to us? =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:40:13 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Page Ranges In a message dated 96-10-23 14:22:44 EDT, Jan wrote: > > I too particularly hate embedding page-range entries, and my experience in > Frame is they can break. In PageMaker it is also horrid nasty stuff to do, > but slightly less so than Frame - less coding work. I do note a tendency in > myself to not want to page range because of the horridness. Sighing loudly > when I have to go back in and add or edit one. I usually write the index > outside of the tool, and then embed it, so that I have the page ranging > figured out before it gets coded and the editing done as well. Jan, I've found that when page ranges break in FrameMaker, it is almost always the result of putting more than one entry (for the same page range) in the marker box--at least in my personal experience. YMMV. Once I realized that was the cause of the breakage, I stopped doing that (though multiple entries in the same marker for single locators is OK) and haven't had a problem with it. The worst nightmare I've experienced in embedded indexing is creating page ranges in WinWord!!!!! For those, you have to create a bookmark covering the area of the page range. The "gotcha" is that Word supports only a limited number of page ranges and I ran hard up against it when embedding entries for a 500-pp book. When that happens, Word just won't generate the index. Aiiish! As you do, I find that creating the index in dedicated indexing software first is a big help in embedding page ranges. (In fact, it helps in creating the entire index! ;-D) > > Perhaps this can be a trade off point when clients insist on embedded > indexing, and insist on short turn-around times. No page ranging! I had a client for which I didn't have to actually embed, but had to provide a page order sort of the index so that someone on their end could actually do the embedding. (This was really cute because I had to cut up slips of paper containing the entries for each page and paste the paper onto the page, then draw arrows from the entries to the points in the text where they were supposed to go. And I had to do it for 27 books, including a 1200-pager! Needless to say, I trained my mother and husband how to do the paste-up so I could concentrate on other things, like actually indexing. ;-D) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:40:15 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: FrameMaker technique (was: Re: Page Ranges) In a message dated 96-10-23 14:22:43 EDT, I wrote: > Note that you define and copy the index entry text for typing > in the <$startrange> building block. Angela, This sentence should have read: "Note that you define and copy the index entry text *before* typing in the <$startrange> building block." I hope I didn't confuse you or anyone else too badly. My apologies! Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:20:18 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: Flames, pajamas, and Indexing cookbooks I agree with Leslie and would like to suggest a compromise. Include personal comments, if you want to, within a posting that has some indexing-relevant content. I think personal asides are fine. If you want to respond to just the personal part, do it off-list. Does that work? Also, when replying, please don't quote others' posts in full (except where the context is needed for clarity). I am seeing many posts that contain whole dialogues. >Think of Index-L as the water cooler as well as the conference room. Does >that help? You bet it does, Elinor. Thanks. Regarding humor on Index-L, to be fair to Joyce and Cynthia, I didn't read their postings as complaints about humor on the list at all. Theirs was clearly (at least I though it was clear) a plea to stick to subjects relevant to indexing. Please keep in mind that some of us do have to pay for the mail we receive, and it can be frustrating to subscribe to an indexing list and find yourself sifting through messages about pajamas, names of our pets (that's a joke about my own accidental posting the other day), and so on. I think it's unfair to assume or suggest that someone who complains about personal posts simply doesn't have a sense of humor. To those of you who are new to Index-L, we really do like each other! But these issues do flare up now and then, as on any big list. I'd hate to see Hazel or anyone else unsubscribe over this, nor do I think it's necessary to. Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | Life is good. Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | Milwaukee, WI | ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:20:37 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: Non-competition agreements I don't feel proprietary about my clients, and I freely give out names of other indexers when (a) I can't take on the offered project or (b) the production editor tells me she's looking for indexers to add to her pool of freelancers. My impression is that these same indexers do me the same favor (actually, professional courtesy). I think there's plenty of work for all of us, and it would never have occurred to me to think that such-and-such a press "belongs" to some other indexer. After all, one indexer can't possibly index all the books from a give press (unless that press is awfully small). I think of this as very much a free-market situation, in which it is ultimately the quality of our work (plus certain personality factors) that will keep the jobs coming in. I might add that because I give out other indexers' names so freely, some of my clients have let on that my name has gone to the top of their list (i.e., to call first), because they know that if I'm unavailable, I'll give them several names to try. And I certainly don't feel as though my relationship with a client is threatened by the appearance of new kids on the block. If I lose a client, it's much more likely that it will be because I screwed up royally. Not because of competition from newcomers. This is a very interesting subject, and I definitely want to hear how others feel about it. One of the things that initially got me interested in indexing as a career was the openness among indexers, the fact that the field is not cutthroat, that there's lots of work to go around. Since I've obviously been rather clueless about the alternative approach, I sure hope I haven't stepped on the toes of other indexers who helped *me* get started. I've always assumed that any indexer is free to contact any publisher she or he wants to, regardless of how the indexer came by the publisher's name. ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 16:42:22 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 20:44:42 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9610D" To: Julius Ariail Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Susan Holbert Subject: Re: Page Ranges I teach (and do) indexing both for mainstream books and for technical manuals. Since the conditions for creating and for using manuals are different from books, I think certain techniques apply only to technical manuals. I often recommend that indexers of user manuals (IOUM) use only intial page numbers when the page headings and page design make it clear where the discussion ends. This is especially helful when the manual uses chapter-page number and every reference looks like 12-100 to 12-103. If a discussion goes beyond one module, then it is very important to use inclusive page numbers. As far as the software limitations go, you have to be practical. Tech writers and indexers are often working under deadlines that force them to create less than perfect indexes. I would rather see the IOUM spend time putting in multiple entries and task-oriented synonyms than wrestling with the very time-consuming problem of inclusive page numbers. I think it offers more to the user. On the subject of over-analyzing (quoted below), again, manual users are different from book readers. They haven't read the text and the don't want to. Also they may have paid thousands of dollars for their software and they don't want to do research in finding info. So I think 1 or 2 locators is fine for user manuals. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that IOUMs should just write down every word they see. It's important to keep concepts general enough so that indexes are not just laundry lists of vocabulary, but actually organize and conceptualize the information in such a way as to direct users to the appropriate information. In other words, it's better to say "formatting commands, 11" (even if the list goes onto page 12) than to have 30 entries scattered throughout the text that looks like "MDNM command", etc. with nothing under "Formatting". I do think that traditional publishers had more concern for saving paper than for serving the reader/user (witness paragraph-style indexing), and tech writing has made a great contribution in using the page design to enhance understanding and in focussing on serving the user (selling more product) rather than saving money by skimping on paper. Please note that I intentionally put the quotation marks before the closing punctuation, because I'm not quoting the comma or period. I'm hoping to start a trend here! (This is the way the British do it, I believe.) Susan >There are no space limitations on my indexes, and so >my clients would rather see everything analyzed so that there are no more >than 2 or 3 locators per index entry. Readers can find the exact piece of >information almost immediately, since main entries are often broken down into >subheadings with only 1 or 2 locators for the most part. I remember reading >in several places that this is considered over-analyzing, and that >subheadings with only 1 locator should be pulled up to the main heading. > But, is that a general rule, or does it apply mostly to traditional book >publishing where space is more of a consideration? Other than space, I can't >think of why subheadings with only 1 locator would be a disadvantage. > >Looking forward to a lively discussion....! > >Angela Howard >AMHoward@aol.com > > Susan Holbert INDEXING SERVICES 24 Harris Steet Waltham, MA 02154-6105 617-893-0514 susanh@world.std.com "Training workshops and videos" ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 16:04:34 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Crisis of confidence In a message dated 96-10-23 14:53:10 EDT, you write: > I guess I'm saying I'm sort > of having a Crisis of Confidence. I've read the books, read the list, gone > to conferences, and I still don't know that I'm producing even adequate > work. I go through the checklist provided by ASI, but it doesn't tell me if > I've made some stupid editing error, or if I missed an indexable term on a > page, or left out an important concept, etc. I think we all go through this. I know that back when I laid out pages as a print production person, I could not even look at a book I had produced after it came back from the printers, because I would see things in it I would have done differently. And I seem to do the same thing with indexes - I cannot look at them for a while after publication, for fear that I will see something awful. But the good news is that for at least one client, I rework the same index over again at least once a year, and when I see what I did last time, it's usually just fine. And it goes back to what one person said recently - we are the only people who only get one try at what we produce for the published piece - writers get editors, copyeditors, and proofers, and time to revise. We don't, usually, although. That's bound to leave us feeling as though we didn't catch everything. Plus, the feedback we get can be spotty - that adds to it as well. Jan Wright ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:13:07 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: lillian ashworth Subject: Advanced beginners Rachel Rice writes as an "advanced beginner": >I guess I'm saying I'm sort >of having a Crisis of Confidence. I've read the books, read the list, gone >to conferences, and I still don't know that I'm producing even adequate >work. I go through the checklist provided by ASI, but it doesn't tell me if >I've made some stupid editing error, or if I missed an indexable term on a >page, or left out an important concept, etc. > >How are other beginner-advanced beginner people handling this? > With a great deal of frustration! Lillian Ashworth ashworth@pullman.com ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 16:35:46 -0500 Reply-To: becohen@prairienet.org Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Barbara E. Cohen" Subject: Re: Competition Having had 4 trainees, I have come to see some variation in how people handle working with my clients. In general, sharing the names of contacts has been one of the main reasons new indexers are motivated to work with an experienced indexer, so I would not be surprised if the client then contacts that indexer after the training period. (or vice versa) But, I assume that anyone with access to my client list exercises great discretion in dealing with my clients, and my training contract clearly states that the trainee will act in a professional manner as a representative of my company for the duration of the contract. It is hard to enforce a contract for behavior after the end of a mentoring or trainee relationship, in my opinion, which is why (a) I don't have one and (b) I try to screen my trainees well before either one of us signs anything! If you are worried about a new indexer "stealing" your clients, you should probably not work with that person in the first place (the trainee, I mean, not the client!). Just my opinion.... no jokes, no pajamas today! Barbara -- Barbara E. Cohen Indexing & Editorial Services Champaign, IL ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 19:04:58 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: TRIP10@AOL.COM Subject: DIGITAL CONTENT PROTECTION (long promo) ******** NFAIS Special Session *********** Cosponsored with ASIS and the Washington, D.C. Chapter of SLA DIGITAL CONTENT PROTECTION: Protecting and Distributing Copyrighted Material-- Where Are We Now? Date/Time: Friday, October 31, 1996, 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Location: AARP Headquarters, 611 E. Street, NW., Washington, D.C. 20049 Price: NFAIS, SLA and ASIS Members $100 each. Lunch Included. Non-Members $125 each. Lunch Included. **** Special Session Moderator: BONNIE LAWLOR (UMI) The White Paper Legislation: Where Is It Going? Presented by JOE BREMNER, Attorney at Law and Author of Guide to Database Distribution. Whatever happened to the legislation that resulted from the President's Information Infrastructure Task Force on Intellectual Property in Digital Environments? Measures designed to extend copyright protection to electronic content met with resistance. But why? And what does it mean for our future as electronic information providers? *** Database Protection: New Rules in Europe (And How They Came To Be) Presented by BARRY MAHON, Executive Director, EUSIDIC. Over a five-year period, EUSIDIC was actively involved in efforts by the European Community to hammer out guidelines for new means of protecting electronic content--beyond copyright and licensing. Hear how the resulting "Database Directive" came to be. What issues were resolved? Which are left outstanding? *** The European Database Directive: What Is The Impact Here? Presented by STEVE METALITZ, Attorney at Law. Members of the European Union will enact new laws over the next several years to protect producers of factual compilations. But many publishers in the U.S. are exempt from protection under these rules, which apply only to publishers who reside in Europe. But efforts are afoot to mirror the European Directive here. Hear the details! **** Building on the White Paper and the EC Directive: The Database Investment and Intellectual Property Act of 1996 Presented by DAN DUNCAN, Information Industry Association. IIA has been working with Congress to draft and introduce legislation that would better protect electronic content. Dan will review these legislative efforts and give a prognosis on the likelihood that these bills will be passed soon. *** Maintaining the Balance--Updating the Copyright Act Presented by PRUE ADLER, Association of Research Libraries (ARL). Recent efforts to update the Copyright Act to the digital environment were not successful during this recent congressional session. Maintaining the balance between the interests of owners and users of copyrighted resources emerged as a key theme in the congressional discussions. Prue will share the library community's views on the recent legislative debates. *** Database Protection--The Possible Downside Presented by PETER JACCZI, Professor of Law, The American University. Critics of the European Database Directive and related legislation in the U.S., fear that proposed changes could be interpreted too broadly and maybe even upset the intellectual-property-protection apple cart. Peter will discuss his concerns about the proposed legislation as written. *** Potential New Legislation and Unresolved Issues-- What Could Happen Next? Presented by JOE BREMNER. What else is happening with copyright--both from a legislative and a case-law point of view? Last year, we saw shrinkwrap licenses come into question, before the courts reversed their decision. In recent years, courts have ruled against as well as in favor of "course-pack" photocopying. Where's it all headed? What could happen next? ________________________________________________ *** To register for this event: Contact. . . The National Federation of Abstracting & Information Services (NFAIS) 1518 Walnut St., Suite 307 Philadelphia, PA 19102 215 893-1561 Fax: 215 893-1564 e-mail: chudie@aol.com or nfais@hslc.org ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 17:02:45 +0000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: mail.bbbiiizzz.com@BIG.BBBIIIZZZ.COM Subject: 1001 FREE places to Promote your web Site! Hello, I wanted to share a site that I recently found on the Internet. It offers 1001 free places to promote your Web Site. If your interested, point your browser to: http://www.strutyourstuff.com This is not my site, I just found it useful and thought you might too. Thanks for your time. ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 22:01:17 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rachel Rice Subject: Re: Non-competition agreements I just finished a copyediting job that was referred to me by another indexer who was offered the job but didn't want it. I wanted to ask the publisher to assign me the index for the same book, so I asked my referring friend first, who said, no problem. Then when I asked editor for the index job, I said, "as long as there is no conflict with [my friend], as I would not take work away from her." Hopefully this covered all the bases and avoided any potential Guilty Conscience problems. Don't know what I'd have done if my friend had said, "no, I don't want you to do that." I think I would have respected her wishes and not *asked* the publisher, but if the publisher had offered first, I would have then said the same thing as above. Rachel Rachel Rice Directions Unlimited Desktop Services Chilmark, Mass. rachelr@tiac.net; http://www.tiac.net/users/rachelr/ ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 22:12:43 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Erika Millen Subject: introduction Hi, everyone. I'm new to the list, so I thought I'd post a brief note and introduce myself. I'm an in-house indexer for a reference-book publisher and index primarily programming and software books, although I occasionally work on general reference books too. (I indexed a dog training manual once, and had a great time... it was a nice break from C++ programming!) Our indexes are coded using Microsoft Word, PageMaker, and an extension to QuarkXPress -- and under some pretty tight deadlines. I'm looking forward to sharing info and ideas with the list. Erika Indianapolis, IN ================================================================= ======== Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 20:55:42 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Crisis of confidence At 04:04 PM 10/23/96 -0400, JanCW@AOL.COM wrote: >Plus, the feedback we get can be spotty - that adds to it as well. "Spotty" doesn't begin to describe it! I frequently never even know if the index arrived at all, let alone what the editor or author thought of it. Can I throw away the pages yet? I dunno...they haven't told me. After one scary incident when I had (after a month) tossed the pages on the recycling pile (and they had been picked up)--and then the editor called in a panic because they had sent me master pages rather than a copy--I decided I would do something about notification. I designed a postcard that I now send with all my completed indexes. It has the title of the book, the author, the date I sent the index, and several boxes to be checked off (disposition of proofs, date index arrived). Plus, I have a box for "comments," which at least occasionally is filled out. This not only frees me from any worry about what to do with pages or whether the index showed up, but it's a backup in case it's later claimed that something of the sort went wrong. It seems to be working pretty well...when I remember to enclose it! =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 00:22:59 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Non-competition agreements Friends, I think Rachel hit upon something there, when she described the communication between herself and her friend, and then between herself and the new client. The act of communicating as she described it clarified the situation and kept it ethical, which is inevitable when anybody gives a client a name of another indexer when he/she can't take a job, as well as in the apprentice/mentor situation. To me it is a question of ethics, at bottom, not to rip off a client from a friend or mentor. We all want business. We know that there is probably more than enough business to go around. And, when we have an opportunity to get repeat business from a new client, we should certainly go after the opportunity ... but that doesn't mean that you don't have to clear the air and discuss it with your friend/mentor beforehand. That's what I do. I also don't think that our clients are foolish or disloyal enough to abandon a working relationship that quickly. Some may go for a low bid from the newcomer, some may not, out of loyalty to me, or out of regard for the quality of my work. I believe that if an editor is tempted by my apprentice's low bid, he/she will soon find out that that person will not turn in the same quality job that I would have, and I have confidence that they will return to me. I don't for a minute think that there is no difference between those indexes. There is, and it should be apparent to the client, too. It would seem to me that a non-competition agreement is really not enforceable once a person no longer works for you -- which has already been well-stated by others on this list. Perhaps while they are your apprentices, but not after. There just is no way! We must trust in the ethics of the person we chose to refer a job to or who we chose to mentor. To me, that's what it boils down to. And good communication will take care of making sure we keep it ethical. Adults should be able to make a phone call and say "how do you feel about .....". Then everything's on the up and up, and nobody is skulking around behind anybody's back. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 00:23:01 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Apprentices/Contracts & M.O. In a recent posting, Barbara Cohen referred to using an contractual agreement with her apprentices, which I found very interesting. Since I am about to embark on my first such relationship, I'm wondering if this is the norm. I would be interested in knowing how others handle this situation. Do you most of you who have apprentices work with a verbal agreement only, or do you have written agreements? How formal do you get? Do you pay your apprentices for the work they do during their apprenticeship? Or do they pay you for the learning experience? There is justification for each. It remains to be seen how the final agreement is fashioned so that it is fair to all. Thanks in advance for sharing your experience. Janet Perlman ----------> jperlman@aol.com Southwest Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 07:12:25 CDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lonergan Lynn Subject: Re: Page Ranges The _Air University Library Index to Military Periodicals_ (of which I am assistant editor) uses page ranges and a plus (+) sign to indicate additional pages after a break. Another periodical index with which I'm familiar uses only the first page. I, personally, prefer our style but that may be a residual of all my years as an index user. FWIW, IMHO, my .02, and so forth. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lynn A. Lonergan Assistant Editor/Librarian Air University Library Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6424 334-953-2504; fax 334-953-1192 llonergan@max1.au.af.mil ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 09:45:08 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Indexer certification? I have just read something about indexer certifiaction. I understand that the British have something like this??? (Anyone in the UK want to address this?) I also understand that several years ago that there was a push for this in ASI and that it did not seem to be very a popular idea. What would be the advantages and disadvantages of something like this? Is it something that would increase our marketability or would it decrease it? Would publishers/authors even care? What kinds of hoops would we have to jump through and what kinds of bells and whistles would we have to ring and blow? Would a certification test be something like, "Create an index in one day for a 250 page book on nuclear physics."? Just wondering... ************ Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 07:11:32 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Pam Rider Subject: Protect Your Work Although the subject differs from indexes and a sample index is unlikely to be "pirated," folks here may find the following useful. > > / / / / / / / / / > >AMERICAN SOCIETY OF JOURNALISTS AND AUTHORS (ASJA) >1501 Broadway, suite 302 >New York, NY 10036 >tel 212-997-0947 >fax 212-768-7414 >e-mail 75227.1650@compuserve.com >http://www.asja.org/ > > > > Protecting Your Writing: Give Yourself Credit > > Prepared by the ASJA Contracts Committee > >When you distribute tearsheets--as samples of your freelance work or as a >courtesy to article subjects--or post your writing on the Internet, what can >you do to help protect your rights? > > Fortunately, U.S. law is on your side. As a freelance, unless you >transfer your rights to a publisher or another party, you own the copyright in >your work from the moment of creation. It's your property, and you have the >right to control and charge for its use. Without your permission-- > > + If a company reprints your article in its employee newsletter, or > makes copies to hand out to customers, that is illegal. > > + If a publicist photocopies your article for press kits, that is > illegal. > > + If a copy shop combines your article with others into a "coursepack" > to be sold to students, that is illegal. > > + If a fan reproduces your article on a homemade World Wide Web page, > that is illegal. > > + If your magazine publisher approves a request for the reuse of your > article, even though you never signed over more than one-time rights, > that is illegal too. > > The law does not say your work must bear a copyright notice--a label >announcing your ownership--but a notice warns those who may not know the law, >so no one can claim "innocent infringement." > > While books almost always include a copyright notice in the author's >name, magazines and newspapers rarely note ownership of individual articles. >The blanket copyright notice in periodicals covers the publisher's own >copyright in the issue as a whole (the "compilation copyright"), not your >copyright in your own piece of that whole. But when you're in control--such as >when making photocopies for your own use, posting on the Internet or >circulating an unpublished manuscript--you can add your own notice. > > ASJA's Contracts Committee recommends the following form: > __________________________________________________________ > Copyright (c) 199x Author Name. It is illegal to reproduce > or distribute this work in any manner or medium without > written permission of the author, street address, city, > state, phone number, fax number, e-mail address.* > __________________________________________________________ > * (Or c/o your agent, your writers' organization, etc.) > > With such a notice you warn, "This is my property. Don't use it without >permission." You send potential reuse customers directly to you, saving them >the extra step of tracking you down through a publisher. And you lessen the >chance that your publisher may authorize reuse when that is properly your >right. > > * > > For information on registering copyrights with the U.S. Copyright Office, >see ASJA's "Copyright Registration for Freelance Writers: Why and How to >Register Your Articles," available at www.asja.org/cwpage.htm or, if you send >a self-addressed stamped envelope, from the ASJA office. > > ### > > > Pam Rider Trying to walk cheerfully on the Earth prider@powergrid.electriciti.com prider@tsktsk.com http://www.electriciti.com:80/~prider/ ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 10:15:46 +0000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: banden@ATLAS.AXIOM.NET Subject: advanced beginners Rachel, I clearly remember being at the advanced beginner stage. One way I coped was to allot more time for editing the index. That meant absolutely jumping on the index as soon as it arrived, so that I could have more days at the end of the process. I also began working for an editor who was a stickler for accurate double postings. I developed a system for checking double postings by using a hard copy and marking it with little checks. I found this process not only helped me keep my double postings accurate, but it gave me a better sense of the overall structure of my index. It offered me another way to look at my index. I have now modified my approach so I can edit on-screen with a paper copy on my desk to mark up. This saves time. Lori Lathrop gave a workshop to my ASI chapter on indexing for quality and usability. One of the ideas she mentioned was to let the index get "cold". I have found this tactic very valuable, as I am able to see it with a "beginner's mind" if I let it sit overnight or even a few hours. Now that I am busier and often doing more than one index at a time, I like to switch off between indexes. One index can sit and rest while I start another. Or, I mix types of indexing during the day. I work better in the morning so I do the more intense content analysis or editing work first thing and then save author indexes for the afternoon. All these techniques help keep my mind and editing eye from glazing over as I work. This is a frustrating phase to be in, but experience does build. Recently, I had to cut an index that had specific length restrictions and I found that I could immediately see the appropriate headings to delete. It was a glorious experience. Learning to produce a good solid index within the length restrictions has definitely been a theme for me this year. Hope this helps. Kay Banning ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 11:16:45 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Susan Holbert Subject: Re: Non-competition agreements and rates I was very glad to hear Carol say there's plenty of work out there. I too think that there's plenty of work out there (and that eventually a million indexers will be hired to index every piece of information on the internet). I also think my clients appreciate getting passed on to another indexer when I'm too busy. I always make sure, though, that that indexer isn't charging less than I do, both by not recommending indexers who always charge rock bottom rates, and by contacting the indexers I respect and telling them what the recommended client has been paying me. Likewise, when I know someone else has worked with a client who contacts me, I will try to talk to the other indexer before negotiating the contract. OTOH, if an academic or non-profit press calls me looking for someone who will index for $2 or $2.50/page and I know they can't pay any more, I will recommend one of my former students, saying, "You can't get an experienced indexer for that rate, but you can get a beginner." I think there's room for all of us, but I certainly would be upset if someone I trained was contributing to bringing down the fees for indexing by charging my clients less than I charged. Susan Holbert INDEXING SERVICES 24 Harris Steet Waltham, MA 02154-6105 617-893-0514 susanh@world.std.com "Training workshops and videos" ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 12:10:19 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Re: Page Ranges At 12:05 PM 10/23/96 -0700, Sonsie wrote >[Orphan subentries] still bother me, appearance-wise, but I can't say why it should...except >that "we've always done it that way." Any ideas as to why this should feel >so wrong to us? I suspect it is founded in sixth grade when we were taught to outline. The rule was that you couldn't have an outline item with only one sub-item. An orphan subentry looks a lot like an outline with a single sub-item. Dick ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 12:06:47 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: Advanced beginners Rachel, when I was very new, I showed my first paid index to a couple of experienced indexers. They trashed it. Ouch! But they also told me, briefly, what to do differently. I would recommend to anyone who is not confident of the quality of her or his work to find an indexer (conditions to be worked out between the two of you) to take a look and give you some feedback. Presumably, you'll either learn how to make you indexes better or be reassured that you're already doing a good job. I hope you find some comfort in the fact that we've all been there. Indexing is complex and takes lots of practice, and no one can do it as well their first year (or even second year) as they will several years later. Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | Life is good. Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | Milwaukee, WI | ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 13:04:50 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: AMHoward@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Advanced beginner On Wed, 23 Oct 1996, Rachel Rice wrote: >Another thing. I'm now calling myself (to you, not to clients) an advanced >beginner. Now that I've progressed to that level I'm finding out how much I >don't know. I see how you all do things and I realize all the mistakes I >made in my first indexes (cringing over them). I guess I'm saying I'm sort >of having a Crisis of Confidence. I've read the books, read the list, gone >to conferences, and I still don't know that I'm producing even adequate >work. I go through the checklist provided by ASI, but it doesn't tell me if >I've made some stupid editing error, or if I missed an indexable term on a >page, or left out an important concept, etc. >How are other beginner-advanced beginner people handling this? I feel exactly the same way; I've been calling myself an advanced beginner, too. I've taken the USDA course (which was immensely valuable) and created several "paid-for" indexes. I, too, feel that the more I learn, the more I find out I don't know, and it gets discouraging sometimes. I love this list, because everyone is so helpful, but I feel a little intimidated sometimes when most of the people who post messages seem so much more advanced than I am. (And please don't anyone feel that they have been intimidating -- it's just my own feelings of inadequacy talking.) My biggest problem is that I'm only doing indexing on the side, one or two every few months or so, and I find that some of what I' learn on one index is forgotten by the time I create another one. My job can be pretty demanding at times, and I have a family, and so I just can't take on that many indexing jobs. I'm hoping to break in to indexing full time at some point. In the meantime, it's hard for me to advance my skills when I'm not doing it all the time, because I have to play catch-up each time just to stay at the level I was at before. I'd be interested in hearing suggestions for this problem. I'm just trying to keep on reading, keep on practicing, and keep on asking questions. So thank you for speaking up about this! I'm glad to know there are other advanced beginners on the list. I feel a little more at home, now. Angela Howard AMHoward@aol.com ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 13:05:16 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Crisis of confidence Sonsie, That postcard is a *great* idea! I can't think of all the times I've sludged through old page proof in my office trying just to move around. Can I toss it, etc. I'd love to know what other types of questions you have for the pub to check. Then I would have to remember to include it with the index, too. And when I send files online, I'll have to devise an online postcard. I can barely remember to send the invoice before trying to get the next job done. (I know that isn't the greatest business sense, but I truly do forget.) Leslie Leslie Leland Frank Editorial Services ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 13:09:15 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Page Ranges Sonsie, The problem I have with leaving the orphan is that people seem to think that page references are missing. This confuses most publishers (if I've accidentally forgotten to tag the orphan onto the main entry, oops). When I have forgotten, the first call I get back is, "Did you leave out page references here? Is something missing?" If it confuses the publisher, I fear it will also confuse the reader. That is my principal concern regarding this issue. Others? Leslie Leslie Leland Frank Editorial Services ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 13:17:54 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Apprentices/Contracts & M.O. Janet, In my one apprenticeship situation, the editor, my apprentice and I had all worked together in house as editors. The editor knew what was going on, contracted my apprentice to do the indexes, and then I took a percentage (it's been a while, but I believe it was 30%) off the final invoice amount. I know you cannot always do it exactly this way. The situation was rare, but similar arrangements could be made if you are the one contracted to do the index. Leslie Leslie Leland Frank Editorial Services ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 13:45:22 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Page Ranges In a message dated 96-10-24 11:36:54 EDT, Sonsie write: > I try to do the same thing you describe above. My question, though, is WHY > do we think this is "over-analysis" and why we feel we need to rewrite the > entries so as to eliminate this "orphan"? Sonsie, I think this compulsion results from when we were taught, so many years ago, how to create outlines. Remember how we weren't supposed to create an A without a B or a 1 without a 2? ;-D I've been trying to get a handle on this myself. I don't know if it is that it offends my sense of symmetry, the result of a dualist outlook on the world, or what! (After all, having an odd number of subentries has never bothered me, as long as there are more than one of them. ;-D) More seriously, when I see a single subentry dangling under a main heading, I tend to wonder why this concept was broken out and not the concept represented by the unanalyzed locator attached to the heading above it. Logic tells me that the higher level heading is discussed more broadly and that the "orphan" represents a narrower focus, but that still doesn't take the edge off of my teeth when I have one hanging in an index. On verrrrry rare occasions, I've left "orphans" alone. In those instances, the locator following the orphan is the only locator for it *and* the heading level above it. (I don't create orphans when the next higher heading level has an unanalyzed locator.) When I do this, it is because I feel that the orphan is absolutely essential to accurately presenting the concept represented by the next higher heading level, and for one reason or another the higher level heading is not amenable to recasting in a way that includes the concept. In the last year or so, I've started putting them on the same line as the higher level heading so that they don't dangle visually at least. ;-D Wow! Now that you really have me thinking about it, it may be part of my difficulty with having unanalyzed locators in the presence of a subentry list (though some of the responses to my post about this were very illuminating, with my favorite one being where the unanalyzed locator is a page range illustrating where a topic is covered extensively and those same locators are included in the subentry list). The reason I've come to this conclusion is that, they don't feel like "orphaned" subs to me when they are pulled up to the higher level heading, but are actually modifiers of that heading, and that I only do it when the higher level doesn't have a locator of its own. Geeesh, Sonsie!!!! Now I'm going to lose sleep over trying to figure out *why* I have this attitude! (Fortunately, that's a good thing, as I need to get this index out anyway.) I truly like to have compelling reasons for whatever I do and to be able to articulate them. Or, if I can't find a compelling reason, why I am so averse to the alternative. If I come up with one, one way or the other, I'll definitely let you know. If anyone out there feels the way I do and *can* articulate your reason for it, please post it here and spare me a nervous breakdown over this issue. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 15:01:06 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DP1301@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Crisis of confidence Sonsie, Your postcard idea is terrifc. Thanks! That would certainly help a great deal. Since I've been emailing indexes in, that post card could go along with the invoice by snail mail. I'm always curious about whether the formatting of my file flows into their computer system with few or no glitches. Deborah Deborah Patton INDEXER Baltimore, MD 410/243-4688 dp1301@aol.com ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 20:33:57 +0100 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Elizabeth M. Moys" Subject: Re: Indexer certification? In-Reply-To: <846177624.13495.7@vms.dc.lsoft.com> In message <846177624.13495.7@vms.dc.lsoft.com>, "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" writes >I have just read something about indexer certifiaction. I understand that >the British have something like this??? (Anyone in the UK want to address this?) >I also understand that several years ago that there was a push for this in >ASI and that it did not seem to be very a popular idea. Yes, indeed we have. In fact, we have a sort of two-level system. Originally (and still) there is Registration. This means submitting an index (usually a published one) to detailed scrutiny by two assessors. They are appointed from among existing Registered Indexers, and their names are not known to the candidate. A high level of accuracy and competence are demanded. I think, subject to correction, that only about one third of applications succeed first time round. the Society of Indexers is very much concerned to preserve its good name and to do all it can to help to raise the standard of indexing in all subjects. The assessors, independently of each other, submit detailed reports on the candidate index, together with a reasoned argument of why they recommend either acceptance or failure. A precis of these arguments is prepared by a third person, and sent to the candidate, together with the result. If we have a "hung jury", a third assessor has a go. The whole procedure is careful and tries to be just to the individual and to "Indexing". Secondly, we run a distance-learning course in five parts. We publish a manual for each section, which candidates are recommended, but not obliged, to purchase and study. Sample exam papers are available. The final test for each section is taken by the candidate at home, in his/her own time. We have a team of markers, working to a carefully compiled marking schedule. Any border-line cases are referred to someone who acts as Chief Marker (though not with that title). People who have succeeded in passing all five sections become Accredited Indexers. They are encouraged, after a while, to submit indexes for Registration, which is the "higher" qualification. Only members with one of these qualifications, or one of the postal tuition passes run by Ann Hall in Scotland, and one or two others (defunct courses, I think) may enter their details in "Indexers Available", or be recommended to publishers by the Registrar, Elizabeth Wallace. > >What would be the advantages and disadvantages of something like this? Is >it something that would increase our marketability or would it decrease it? >Would publishers/authors even care? What kinds of hoops would we have to >jump through and what kinds of bells and whistles would we have to ring and >blow? Would a certification test be something like, "Create an index in one >day for a 250 page book on nuclear physics."? > Only people in other countries can decide what would be best for them. I am only trying to answer the factual question. Our arrangements are not free from controversy over here. But it is my personal impression that a considerable majority of Society of Indexers members are reasonably happy with them. If anyone wants more information, you have only to ask. Betty Moys, Treasurer, Society of Indexers ================================================================= === Elizabeth M. Moys email: betty@moys.demon.co.uk Phone & Fax: +44 (0)1959-534530 Hengist, Badgers Road, Badgers Mount, Sevenoaks, Kent, TN14 7AT, England ================================================================= === ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 15:58:14 -0400 Reply-To: wgm@sageline.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "William G. Meisheid" Organization: Sageline Publishing Subject: Re: introduction >>Our indexes are coded using Microsoft Word, PageMaker, and an extension to QuarkXPress -- and under some pretty tight deadlines. Erika, What tools do you use in Word for indexing? Do you use your own macros or something else? -- William Meisheid "Thoughts still and always in progress" Certified RoboHELP Training WUGNET/Hypertext Technologies Styles/Contents/Etc. sysop on CIS Sageline Publishing www.sageline.com wgm@sageline.com 410.465.1548 Fax: 410.744.2456 ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 16:01:09 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Susan Holbert Subject: Re: Indexing with Word 7 Dick, I think this is of great interest to the many people on the list who are asked to embed indexes. I always create the index first in dedicated indexing software, print it out in page-number order, and then find someone (hopefully at the client company) to embed the index. Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 20:44:42 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9610D" To: Julius Ariail But I couldn't tell from your description whether you are creating a separate file for the index or whether this embeds the index into the document where the entries are highlighted. That would be truly incredible! Susan Dick wrote: 1. Using the Word 7 highlighting feature, scan your document and highlight words and phrases just as you would with a highlighting pen on hard copy. 2. When everything is highlighted, run a macro to scan the document and create a concordance from the highlighted items. 3. Edit the concordance and tell Word what index entries you want to create from each word or phrase. 4. Run another macro to generate the index. 5. Review the resulting index, revise and repeat steps 1-4 as required. Susan Holbert INDEXING SERVICES 24 Harris Steet Waltham, MA 02154-6105 617-893-0514 susanh@world.std.com "Training workshops and videos" ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 16:26:38 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Indexer certification? Cynthia, You are right -- it was being discussed a few years ago. I am not in favor of certification. It reeks of elitism to me. We are working in a field that we have previously discussed on this very listserve as being creative and non-standardized. Remember the discussion about The Perfect Index, and whether there was one. Nobody came forth strongly to discuss this model of perfection. 99% of those responding (unscientific percentage) viewed indexing as creative and individual. We discussed how people doing the same index would all do it differently, out of their own individual approaches and life experience, and how the same indexer might turn out two different products for the same book at different times. Given that this is a creative work, then there can be no perfection and nothing but minimum standards. Beyond that, it's all up for grabs, as far as I'm concerned. No one way is "better" than another. I would not compare us with accountants, whose work is so standardized that they can have a certification called the CPA. Measure up to standards or you don't get your CPA. In fact, when a CPA gets too "creative", we suspect him/her of illegalities! So ... who would create these standards? Who would decide on Good, Better, and Best? It boggles the mind to think that anybody would even try. I see ASI's Wilson Award for Excellence as ASI's attempt to encourage quality indexing, and to put forth high standards for the practioners to uphold. And, the moral of the story is that quite a few times in the past few years, no award has been given. Draw what conclusions you will from that! I see recognition of high quality as the way to go, and not certification. Nor can I think of what it would accomplish, beyond bureaucratizing the entire profession. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 16:57:32 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Indexing with Word 7 In a message dated 96-10-24 11:35:09 EDT, you write: > I've had some inquiries about creating indexes in Word. The built in > indexing features are pretty pitiful, but I did try one small project by > creating the index in CINDEX and paying someone to just type the > corresponding tags into Word. Since then, I've been playing around with > writing some macros that might make actual index creation more efficient. > > To that end, I bought a book called "Introduction to WordBasic Programming:, > ISBN 1-874416-82-6. > Fascinating! I didn't know that macros could pick up highlighting! This sounds a little similar to Doc-To-Help's indexing, only the last version I saw did not have highlighting, just searching the text for specific strings, and then would insert the indexing you choose for them. RoboHelp is talking about an indexing feature that allows you to highlight a word and it becomes an index entry, but this Word 7 macro sounds more powerful than that. Thanks so much for sending the info out! Jan Wright ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 19:15:14 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Erika Millen Subject: indexing in Word >What tools do you use in Word for indexing? Do you use your own macros >or something else? We index out of the author/editorial files, so we just use the built-in Word indexing functions. The indexing codes import into PageMaker with the rest of the text, and then we compile and edit the indexes using PageMaker. It works... sort of. Unfortunately (as I'm sure you've discovered!), Word indexing codes just don't import very well. We learned very quickly that Word 7 doesn't import into PageMaker 6 at all, so everything we do have to be backsaved into Word 6. Page ranges won't import either, so we have to "space out" out our index codes and then manually crunch the numbers into a range. Index entries longer than 51 characters won't import correctly, so we have to re-enter those once the chapter is in production. (I know... 51 characters is pretty generous, but when you have entries like "Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol," you use up the 51-character limit very quickly!) We've also discovered that we can't code certain special characters: slashes, quotation marks, double colons. And of course I miss having a Sort feature. What tools do you use with Word? Do you similar problems with software compatibility? I'm always looking for alternative software, patches, filters... anything that can help solve the import problems. Right now, editing a compiled index is something we all dread. Erika Indianapolis, IN ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 22:08:11 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Re: Indexing with Word 7 At 04:01 PM 10/24/96 -0400, you wrote: >Dick, >I think this is of great interest to the many people on the list who are >asked to embed indexes. I always create the index first in dedicated >indexing software, print it out in page-number order, and then find someone >(hopefully at the client company) to embed the index. > >But I couldn't tell from your description whether you are creating a >separate file for the index or whether this embeds the index into the >document where the entries are highlighted. That would be truly incredible! It embeds the tags at your highlights. I still haven't had time to try it but my curiosity is getting the better of me and I will have to soon. Dick ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 22:15:02 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Re: Indexing with Word 7 At 04:57 PM 10/24/96 -0400, you wrote: >> >Fascinating! I didn't know that macros could pick up highlighting! It picks up the highlighting provided by the "highlighting pen" in Word 7. The WordBasic command is EditFindHighlighting. Dick ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 20:01:18 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Crisis of confidence At 01:05 PM 10/24/96 -0400, LLFEdServ@AOL.COM wrote: >That postcard is a *great* idea! I can't think of all the times I've >sludged through old page proof in my office trying just to move around. Can >I toss it, etc. I'd love to know what other types of questions you have for >the pub to check. Then I would have to remember to include it with the >index, too. I bought a box of four-up postcards from Paper Direct, which is a great supplier of nifty stationery supplies in small quantities. Not cheap, but very attractive stuff for small businesses. They have a glossy photo on the front of a bunch of paper airplanes and crumpled paper, and the back side is blank. I used PageMaker to do the template for the back, and since the postcards ARE pretty small, I couldn't get everything on there I would like. But what I have is a line for the author and title (which I fill in), a line for the date the index was sent to the publisher (I write this in, too), and another line with a checkbox where they write the date the index was received. I have a little place marked "Disposition of proofs: Hold until [blank for date], destroy, return." Finally, I have an area labeled "comments" and hope they will write something. And sometimes they do! Finally, I put my address on there. I print these out in small quantities on my laser printer, and enclose them with each job. I ought to do one for editing as well, but never have gotten around to it. I keep forgetting to send this along, so now I get out the card and fill out my part of it the day I get the first batch of pages...along with assigning a job number and making a folder for the paperwork. The postcard is clipped to the front of the folder, where I can't miss it when I go to do the billing. It seems to be working for me. >And when I send files online, I'll have to devise an online postcard. I can >barely remember to send the invoice before trying to get the next job done. >(I know that isn't the greatest business sense, but I truly do forget.) If you can come up with one, please share! I have yet to work with a client who was able to (or willing to) accept indexes via email, but it sure would be great. And give me an extra day or two to meet the deadline, since I can send email at 3 AM and have it arrive nearly instantaneously. And if it doesn't go through...well, I can do it again right away. =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 20:01:16 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Protect Your Work At 07:11 AM 10/24/96 -0700, Pam Rider wrote: >Although the subject differs from indexes and a sample index is unlikely to >be "pirated," folks here may find the following useful. Thanks for the "heads up," Pam. This subject usually comes up at least once or twice a year, and it's good to have a quick review of the rules. =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 23:06:42 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Re: Indexing with Word 7 Well, my first trial run was not thrilling. I installed the macros from the diskette that came in the book. This puts a toolbar in MS-Word. My first observation was that the buttons on the toolbar are too small for the text they contain and there is no apparent way to make the buttons or the toolbar larger. The book also said you could dock the toolbar at the right edge and the buttons would rotate 90 degrees but I couldn't get that to work. There is a 3-page test document with the macros so I opened that. I highlighted some terms and pressed the "Collect Index Terms" button. This gathered my highlighted items, built a concordance, and placed the concordance in a new document. So far so good. However, as I started to edit the concordance I found that the items are in alphabetical order with no way of knowing what page they had come from. Even on a 3-page document I found I couldn't always remember why I had selected some items and had to go back to the document to refresh my memory. Had this been a document of several hundred pages, this would have been a chore. I finished editing the concordance, saved it, and pressed the "Create Index Entries" button. This inserted XE tags at all my highlighted items. Then I pressed the "Build Document Index" button and things got nasty. The generated index was not in alphabetical order and the section headers did not match the first letter of the items in the section. For instance, the first item in section "A" was "macros." I decided to regenerate the index from the concordance and pressed the "Remove Index Entries" button. This should have removed all the XE tags but instead sent Word into hourglass mode, from which it never recovered. I'm going to try calling Wrox Press (the publisher) tomorrow. Dick ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 20:17:20 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Page Ranges At 01:45 PM 10/24/96 -0400, Wildefire@AOL.COM wrote: > >I think this compulsion results from when we were taught, so many years >ago, how to create outlines. Remember how we weren't supposed to create an A without a B or a 1 without a 2? Yes, I was taught this, too, and it "feels" like part of the reason that "dangling subentries" bother me. But lately I've begun to think like an author and while I still don't love 'em, I'm willing to leave them there if the author has, indeed, created only one subhead below a main head. Now ask me what I would do if I had been editing that book, and my answer would be, "I'd find a way to make another subhead!" >Geeesh, Sonsie!!!! Now I'm going to lose sleep over trying to figure out >*why* I have this attitude! (Fortunately, that's a good thing, as I need to >get this index out anyway.) I truly like to have compelling reasons for >whatever I do and to be able to articulate them. Or, if I can't find a >compelling reason, why I am so averse to the alternative. If I come up with >one, one way or the other, I'll definitely let you know. If anyone out there feels the way I do and *can* articulate your reason for it, please post it here and spare me a nervous breakdown over this issue. ;-D Yes, I have the same need to =know= why I'm doing something, and be able to explain it articulately to somebody else. Damned if I know, though, exactly WHY I feel that a single subentry is a Bad Thing most of the time. But your suggestions about that are making my mind work overtime! Sonsie Carbonara Conroy Catalyst Communication Arts Advertising and Publication Services ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 23:27:43 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Locatelli@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Indexer certification (long) I have to disagree with Janet that there can only be minimum standards for indexing. Even given the fact that indexes created by different indexers will be different, I do believe it is possible to determine levels of expertise in how an index was completed. For three years I was on the choral panel of the National Endowment for the Arts. We listened to over 100 choruses and decided which were to be awarded grants, and even recommended grant amounts. (All our recommendations went to the National Council on the Arts for their final decision.) We evaluated intonation, tone quality, ensemble (together or ragged), etc. All of those things I liken to the mechanics of indexing. We also had to evaluate whether the interpretation of the music was appropriate or not. And here we get into the are that Janet feels cannot be judged. Given all of the expertise around the table--and we were chosen for our experience and knowledge--we were able to judge whether an interpretation was appropriate or not for the music. Note that we were *not* judging whether one interpretation was better or not, or whether we would have performed the same interpretation, or even whether we particularly liked that interpretation, but rather, whether it appropriate for the music. In a similar fasion, I believe that one can judge an index, first on the mechanics, then on its appropriateness to the subject. And further, one can judge with what finesse difficult details were handled, look at unusual treatments. In short, exactly what the Wilson Award does. The choral panelists' "standards" were their ears--their years of listening to hundreds of performances and knowing what a good chorus sounds like. Even in art it is possible to determine levels of proficiency. Finally, though, at the highest levels, one can only say, these two choruses are equal technically and produce equally appropriate interpretations. So we give them the same (large) amount of money. Certainly certification can be recognition of high quality. Fund raisers have been doing it for years, based on a written exam of fund raising principles and actual results in raising dollars. I think perhaps that for some reason we are afraid of recognizing quality. But think of the Kennedy Center Honors. We recognize that there are certain artists who have made incomparable (but different) contributions to the arts. Perhaps the two-tiered level of recognition is possible: tier 1: you can do the basics and produce a useable, serviceable index. And let me be clear, that is a fine thing to do. Tier 2: qualification based on reaching a level of "artistic merit," let's say, elegance, as judged by our peers. In summary, I think it is certainly possible to have qualifications and judge indexes for quality. The next questions is, do we want to? And that's for another message. Fred Leise "Between the Lines" Indexing and Editorial Services ================================================================= ======== Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 23:35:58 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: MrsIndex@AOL.COM Subject: Indexer certif. Busy people: ignore >>I would not compare us with accountants, whose work is so standardized that they can have a certification called the CPA. Measure up to standards or you don't get your CPA. In fact, when a CPA gets too "creative", we suspect him/her of illegalities!<< Maybe certification would be more comparable to admission to a creative arts organization like the American Watercolor Society. The artists who have been accepted into the AWS are without a doubt very good artists, but there is a definite slant toward certain styles. And there are many excellent watercolor painters whose styles don't please the current crop of judges. Maybe it's not such a hot comparison, though. It seems that you could make the argument that an index should be realistic, or maybe even impressionistic, but definitely not expressionistic. Or maybe it should be all three at once. Anyone else have any artistic/philosophical ramblings? Allison ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 00:06:49 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Parrish Subject: Re: business names Lynn writes: "Eeek! The question should be "what have *I* done" by posting that little tongue-in-cheek aside about cool last names-business names. ;-D Are you concerned that Parrish Professional Indexing, when said over the phone, may sound too parochial or is confined only to certain locations in Louisiana? ;-D" I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek as well. But as you discussed plays on words I suddenly realized that Parrish Professional Indexing (which I had liked the sound of) could be heard: "Perish, Professional Indexing!" which could make this whole profession I am joining mightily disgusted with me. Yes, my editorial services include ghost writing. I hoped that the name would be memorable and would warn that I would not help anyone cheat. Grateful for this list, Ann Parrish Parrish Professional Indexing The Ethical Ghost: Editorial Services ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 00:42:04 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Michael Brackney Subject: quotation marks and page ranges On Wed, 23 Oct 1996 Susan Holbert concluded her message on page ranges with a reference to the ending of a foregoing sentence that read: "...with nothing under 'Formatting'". She wrote: Please note that I intentionally put the quotation marks before the closing punctuation, because I'm not quoting the comma or period. I'm hoping to start a trend here! (This is the way the British do it, I believe.)" Dear Susan: Thanks for this comment! I've been advocating this practice for quite a while myself. Can't stand including punctuation marks in quotations they're not part of, especially in indexes! Some time ago it was a treat for me to come across a section in the Chicago Manual of Style on the logical way in which the British use quotation marks--welcome support for my own 'til then antithetical practice--and now it's great to hear you proclaiming it on the net. A couple of other comments: >I often recommend that indexers of user manuals (IOUM) use only intial page >numbers when the page headings and page design make it clear where the >discussion ends. This is especially helful when the manual uses chapter-page >number and every reference looks like 12-100 to 12-103. Being able to know where the discussion ends once you get to the text helps a lot, but as Lynn pointed out, it's not enough: readers need to be able to find out how much discussion there is from the index itself. >If a discussion goes beyond one module, then it is very important to use >inclusive page numbers. As far as the software limitations go, you have to >be practical. Tech writers and indexers are often working under deadlines >that force them to create less than perfect indexes. I would rather see the >IOUM spend time putting in multiple entries and task-oriented synonyms than >wrestling with the very time-consuming problem of inclusive page numbers. I >think it offers more to the user. I share your druthers but I hope it doesn't really come down to this. If it does I think we need to speak up and demand enough time to do good work. If we don't, we're acquiescing with our lives to the worst of the rat race. In my experience people who value what I do are willing to consider anything serious (or humorous) I have to say--if not for the current project then for the next. >On the subject of over-analyzing (quoted below), again, manual users are >different from book readers. They haven't read the text and the don't want >to. Also they may have paid thousands of dollars for their software and they >don't want to do research in finding info. So I think 1 or 2 locators is >fine for user manuals. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean that IOUMs should just >write down every word they see. It's important to keep concepts general >enough so that indexes are not just laundry lists of vocabulary, but >actually organize and conceptualize the information in such a way as to >direct users to the appropriate information. In other words, it's better to >say "formatting commands, 11" (even if the list goes onto page 12) than to >have 30 entries scattered throughout the text that looks like "MDNM >command", etc. with nothing under "Formatting". I appreciate this: analysis, not indiscriminate listing of terms not discussed--or what I call indexing by vague association either. >I do think that traditional publishers had more concern for saving paper >than for serving the reader/user (witness paragraph-style indexing), and >tech writing has made a great contribution in using the page design to >enhance understanding and in focussing on serving the user (selling more >product) rather than saving money by skimping on paper. Hear hear. Michael Brackney Brackney Indexing Service 134 Kathleen Way Grass Valley, CA 95945 916-272-7088 ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 02:17:03 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Victoria Baker Subject: Re: Indexer certification? There was a discussion of this issue (in the U.S.) a couple of years ago in several issues of _Key Words_. I admit I don't have the index so I can't say where it is--someone else? ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:17:44 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Re: Indexer certification? Yes, the debate on indexer certification was in "Key Words", vol.1 (no. 3), pages 4-6, with answers from readers in vol. 1 (no. 4), page 16 and (no. 5). pages 5-9, 21. If anyone has those issues, would it be possible to summarize the gist of what was said? Thanks. At 02:17 AM 10/25/96 -0700, Victoria Baker wrote: >There was a discussion of this issue (in the U.S.) a couple of years ago in >several issues of _Key Words_. ************ Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:24:02 -0400 Reply-To: wgm@sageline.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "William G. Meisheid" Organization: Sageline Publishing Subject: Re: indexing in Word Erika, >>We learned very quickly that Word 7 doesn't import into PageMaker 6 at all, so everything we do have to be backsaved into Word 6. I am very interested in this problem since Word 7 and 6 are supposed to have the same DOC file format. The SAVE AS function doesn't even have a Word 6 option. Could you elaborate on any differences you found. If you want to reply off list that is fine. -- William Meisheid "Thoughts still and always in progress" Certified RoboHELP Training WUGNET/Hypertext Technologies Styles/Contents/Etc. sysop on CIS Sageline Publishing www.sageline.com wgm@sageline.com 410.465.1548 Fax: 410.744.2456 ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:26:12 -0400 Reply-To: wgm@sageline.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "William G. Meisheid" Organization: Sageline Publishing Subject: Re: Indexing with Word 7 Jan, >>Fascinating! I didn't know that macros could pick up highlighting! If you open the Find dialog in Word and look at the bottom of the Format option you will see "Hightlight". Selecting that option searches for Word 7 highlights. That can be used in a macro (using the record function) to search for hightlights in the document text in Word 7 and above. -- William Meisheid "Thoughts still and always in progress" Certified RoboHELP Training WUGNET/Hypertext Technologies Styles/Contents/Etc. sysop on CIS Sageline Publishing www.sageline.com wgm@sageline.com 410.465.1548 Fax: 410.744.2456 ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:57:56 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Crisis of confidence/postcards Sonsie, Your postcard procedure -- what a great idea! Do you find that you get more feedback from clients this way? Do you include a stamp on the postcards to help get responses? I often submit index files electronically. When I do so via email, I cc myself on the email message to verify that the message was sent and I always ask that the client let me know if they got the file(s) allright. Unfortunately, I seem to rarely hear back, and often only becuase the file got chomped or lost or some such. When I submit files modem-to-modem, it's usually clear, of course if they got the files. If the client has a private bulletin board, I will post an email message to my contact there, asking for verification that they got the files, etc. BTW, when it comes to holding old pp proofs, I usually hang on to them until I get paid for the job. Thanks for the tips, Pilar Wyman Indexing Annapolis, MD Tel/Fax: 410-263-7537 Email: PilarW@aol.com ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:01:42 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rachel Rice Subject: Re: Crisis of confidence:THANKS! I want to thank everyone for all your terrific and supportive responses. I plan to answer all messages individually, but since there were so many it will take a while. I didn't want anyone to think I am ungrateful. Eventually I'll be compiling the responses I got to my question about checklists and posting that here. Maybe even later today! As a followup, the day after I wrote that message, I got an assignment from someone who was referred by a publisher who was happy with the index I did for him. So between that and all your support, I feel a lot better. Meanwhile, I'm rereading Mulvaney, Chicago's Chapter, and everything else, and one of these days I might even manage to finish the USDA course. It's only been 2 years. Thanks again, Rachel Rachel Rice Directions Unlimited Desktop Services Chilmark, Mass. rachelr@tiac.net; http://www.tiac.net/users/rachelr/ ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 22:05:38 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Max McMaster Subject: Re: Indexer certification? (long) Cynthia Bertelsen wrote: >I have just read something about indexer certification. I understand that >the British have something like this??? (Anyone in the UK want to address this?) >I also understand that several years ago that there was a push for this in >ASI and that it did not seem to be very a popular idea. In Australia, like the UK we have an indexer certification system. Our system has some similarities to the UK one outlined by Betty Moys, but there are some differences as well. Registrants submit an index usually to a book, but can be to a cumulation of a journal, minutes of meetings, etc. to a Panel of Assessors. The book needs to have a minimum extent of 200 pages to provide sufficient depth of material for indexing, however the index does not necessarily need to be bound into the volume. Indexes external to a book (which had no prior index) are perfectly acceptable, and in fact are a very common way for Australian indexers to get started. The book (and index) are submitted to the Chairman of the Panel of Assessors, and given a detailed evaluation - covering completeness of indexing, selection of terms, usefulness of entries (bearing in mind the audience for which the book was written) , consistency of indexing, use of cross references, accuracy of entries, and ease of use. All these points considered from both the user's perspective and the publishers, where space for the index, time for the index and cost are significant factors. If the index is a clear pass (and the pass mark is well in excess of 50%, probably somewhere in the 70-80% range) or the index is a clear fail, no further assessment is carried out. Applicants who pass receive a certificate and are entitled to call themselves "Registered Indexers". Applicants who fail cannot reapply for a further six months. Borderline applications are passed on to other Panel members for their opinion. >What would be the advantages and disadvantages of something like this? Is >it something that would increase our marketability or would it decrease it? >Would publishers/authors even care? What kinds of hoops would we have to >jump through and what kinds of bells and whistles would we have to ring and >blow? Would a certification test be something like, "Create an index in one >day for a 250 page book on nuclear physics."? You ask why bother with certification at all? Registration (or certification) at least in Australia has two major functions. Firstly it provides a benchmark for the editor or publisher who is considering using a particular indexer on some job, and secondly is of benefit to the indexer as it increases their chance of obtaining work. AusSI produces a publication called Indexer's Available (as does the UK) which provides details of those indexers who are prepared to accept commissions on indexing. Although any AusSI member can be included at their request (which is currently free), Registered Indexers have their name appearing in bold type in the alphabetical name section, and under the list of subject specialties, Registered Indexers names are also shown in bold. These names obviously stand out compared to unregistered ones. Indexers Available is sent free of charge to all the major publishing houses in Australia and New Zealand and is one source of information for editors and publishers seeking indexers. In effect Registration provides a quality control check on indexing competence, and means a publisher can choose an indexer (in the appropriate discipline) with a reasonable degree of certainty of getting a reasonable index created. Otherwise, unless the publisher has had prior experience of the indexer, or can attain this knowledge through the editors grapevine there is no degree of certainty of what they might get. Max McMaster Chairman, Panel of Assessors Australian Society of Indexers ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:47:01 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Indexer certification Fred, Thank you for your excellent, thought-provoking posting. I found myself agreeing with you (somewhat), despite my original ideas. I must, and will, consider further. Granting that it *may* be possible to judge quality in terms of minimum standards and higher levels of excellence, I think the real nub of the question is, as you said "but do we want to." I am hoping you will post again with your view on that too. Thank yous to Betty Moys for her posting describing the UK system of certification, and to Cynthia, for locating the previous discussion in KeyWords. I'm going to take a look at them (I just located them), and I'll post a summary later today. Certification is a knotty issue, and it must be considered from the mind as well as from the heart. These postings are invaluable for that. How wonderful to have this exchange of professional ideas! Thank you again! Janet ______________ Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 10:29:41 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: indexing in Word In a message dated 96-10-24 21:01:50 EDT, Erika writes: > What tools do you use with Word? Do you similar problems with software > compatibility? I'm always looking for alternative software, patches, > filters... anything that can help solve the import problems. Right now, > editing a compiled index is something we all dread. > > Erika, would it be easier to just index the files once they are in PageMaker? PageMaker's indexing is easier to use, more graphical, and gives you the "Show Index" dialog box to make editing easier. Could you change your process so that indexing doesn't happen until the files are imported into Word? When I'm presented with this same problem, that is always what I insist on. (I hate rework :-} - why bother if you can do it right the first time?) If it is due to time constraints, developing the index outside the files in a standalone package, and then inputting it all at once would save time and give you a good index as well. And eliminate these import problems. Jan Wright ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 10:42:10 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Indexer Certification Friends, Please excuse if the following message is a duplicate posting. My original transmission came back to me with a mail failure" message, so I am re-posting. Janet Perlman ========================== Fred, Thank you for your excellent, thought-provoking posting. I found myself agreeing with you (somewhat), despite my original ideas. I must, and will, consider further. Granting that it *may* be possible to judge quality in terms of minimum standards and higher levels of excellence, I think the real nub of the question is, as you said "but do we want to." I am hoping you will post again with your view on that too. Thank yous to Betty Moys for her posting describing the UK system of certification, and to Cynthia, for locating the previous discussion in KeyWords. I'm going to take a look at them (I just located them), and I'll post a summary later today. Certification is a knotty issue, and it must be considered from the mind as well as from the heart. These postings are invaluable for that. How wonderful to have this exchange of professional ideas! Thank you again! Janet ______________ Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:21:24 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Laura M. Gottlieb" Subject: Crises of confidence 25 October 1996 One strategy I have used--in lieu of feedback from publishers on the quality of my indexing work--is to compare the index I submitted to the index that's published in the book. Comparing them made me see what kinds of changes editors made to my index, and sometimes made me understand why. I don't really know how valid the conclusions are that one might draw from such an exercise (has the editor cut out certain things because of space limitations or because she/he found them superfluous?), and I have no idea of how knowledgable editors are about indexing (so are they valid judges of indexex?), but I *have* found it useful to see what they look for and what they rule out. And several times, unfortunately, I've found mistakes that *they've* introduced into the printed version! Laura Moss Gottlieb Freelance Indexer Laura Moss Gottlieb Freelance Indexer 212 Highland Avenue Madison, Wisconsin 53705 (608) 233-4559 pgottlie@facstaff.wisc.edu ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 10:30:53 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: indexing in Word Given all the problems with Word's indexing feature (yes, I've used it and PageMaker's indexing feature, too), I wonder what the advantage is at all? Why not just go ahead and buy some dedicated indexing software, instead of creating macros and looking for patches and filters? I mean, consider the salary the person gets who actually does all that manipulation (including the dreaded editing of the half-ASCIIed sort) and how many hours are put in tinkering. Is it over $500 worth in a year? The only real use I can think of for the embedded tags is for documents that are redone every year. Maybe I'm missing something, though. Cheers, ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 10:30:59 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: sending indexes via e-mail (was: crisis of confidence) >If you can come up with one, please share! I have yet to work with a client >who was able to (or willing to) accept indexes via email, but it sure would >be great. And give me an extra day or two to meet the deadline, since I can >send email at 3 AM and have it arrive nearly instantaneously. And if it >doesn't go through...well, I can do it again right away. I keep on hand a sample for this purpose, one that contains tabs, itals, and boldface. When I get a new assignment, I sound the production editor out about receiving the index as an e-mail attachment. Most mail programs have a way of letting you send an attached file. If the person says OK, I send this sample as a file attachment, and the production editor lets me know whether it was (a) openable, (b) readable, and (c) looked like an index. If all the answers are yes, then I know that I'll be able to send the finished index that way. If the production editor sounds scared, I let it drop and plan to use FedEx. There are still some computerphobic (or just e-mail-phobic) folks out there, and I don't want to make them uncomfortable about having hired me. Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | Life is good. Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | Milwaukee, WI | ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:36:35 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Printers, purchasing of Just this week, it took two full hours for my aged Epson dot-matrix printer to crank out a 72-page-long index. Yipes! The printer used to work quickly with my old 386, but now that I have a pentium, the printer works at the speed of sludge. Obviously, a new printer is in order. I've read *Consumer Reports*. I've gone to stores and hunted around. I'm teetering on the brink of purchasing a Hewlett-Packard inkjet printer that costs about $179 and prints three to four pages per minute in black and white. But before I finish teetering and fall over completely, I'd like to check with you folks. What kinds of printers are you using? What are the advantages and disadvantages of lasers and inkjets? What can I purchase that won't bankrupt me? I am appalled that the inkjet cartridge will (theoretically) last only 150 pages and then I'll have to cough up $25 or so for a new one. (I realize there's some way to recycle these.) If this isn't a pertinent topic for the list, please e-mail me directly. TIA, Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) sign that your cat has learned your Internet password: hate-mail messages to Apple Computer Corp. about its release of "CyberDog" ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:39:05 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Crisis of confidence At 03:01 PM 10/24/96 -0400, DP1301@AOL.COM wrote: >Your postcard idea is terrifc. Thanks! That would certainly help a great >deal. Since I've been emailing indexes in, that post card could go along >with the invoice by snail mail. I'm always curious about whether the >formatting of my file flows into their computer system with few or no >glitches. That would work...sending the card with the invoice. I suspect if the index HADN'T arrived via email by the time the bill had come, you would hear about it. =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:39:04 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Indexer certification? At 04:26 PM 10/24/96 -0400, JPerlman@AOL.COM wrote: >Given that this is a creative work, then there can be no perfection and >nothing but minimum standards. Beyond that, it's all up for grabs, as far >as I'm concerned. No one way is "better" than another. > >I would not compare us with accountants, whose work is so standardized that >they can have a certification called the CPA. Measure up to standards or >you don't get your CPA. In fact, when a CPA gets too "creative", we >suspect him/her of illegalities! Janet, I'm NOT arguing in favor of certification...frankly I'm not certain how I feel about it. But a more apt comparison of indexing certification might be to licensing architects (or even lawyers). In any state, an architect must meet certain minimum requirements and pass a difficult test that extends over about three days. But there is absolutely nothing in the test[s] that demands that all houses be built the same way, or look alike. Only that they be safe, habitable, and meet current building codes. And i'm Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 20:44:42 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9610D" To: Julius Ariail sure if you look around you, you can see that each architect has his or her own style of design...and that in most cases House A is equivalent to House B in meeting the minimum standards, though they look and function quite differently. =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:57:50 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Barbara Stroup Dear Indexers: Can anyone comment on the special requirements and techniques for indexing an encyclopedia (one volume, special topic, young adult type). The 312 page book is typeset in two column format and the editor requests a four-column index (12-13 pages). I am submitting a time/money estimate asap and would appreciate your input. I hope I've given you enough information; it's all I have. Barbara Stroup Indexer ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 12:08:56 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Re: Crisis of confidence/postcards Pilar wrote: >BTW, when it comes to holding old pp proofs, I usually hang on to them until >I get paid for the job. I used to do that to, but had a recent situation where I would have gotten burned doing so. I mentioned a while back that I had had to rework an index. I had been paid for the original and it had (unfortunately) already been printed. The publisher wanted a rework for a second printing. Luckily, I still had my first markup. Dick Evans ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 12:20:22 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Sending files electronically Piggybacking on Pilar's remarks about using the postcard and sending files electronically ... a caution about electronic submissions. Although I very much enjoy the extra day or so that comes with not having to send disks by FedEx or UPS, I learned that I cannot always assume my file was received by the client. I recently had the experience of completing a very large project right on a tight deadline. It was promised for noon on a given day, and timing was critical. I emailed the file (attached it to an email) at 11 AM, and it uploaded fine. Feeling good about finishing the project, I didn't give it any further thought. You can imagine my horror when I received a panicky phone call at 1 PM from my client to inquire if the file had been sent yet. He had never received it! Of course, I emailed the file again, and called him to be certain he got it. All was OK, and that was the end of that. A follow-up phone call on Monday revealed that the errant first email message and file was never received! So the moral of the story is that messages (and files) do get lost in cyberspace, and you can never be certain. I now make it a practice to call my client to confirm that the file was received and that they could open and use it. While I think the postcard is a lovely idea, you wait to receive the confirmation, which doesn't help if there is a deadline situation. I prefer to make the phone call and ensure that my client is satisfied. The $1 or so cost for a brief phone conversation is worth it to me. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 12:30:29 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Karl E. Vogel" Organization: Control Data Systems Inc. Subject: Re: Indexer certification? >> On Thu, 24 Oct 1996 16:26:38 -0400, >> Janet Perlman said: J> Given that this is a creative work, then there can be no perfection and J> nothing but minimum standards. Beyond that, it's all up for grabs, as far J> as I'm concerned. No one way is "better" than another. The problem is that some indexes are definitely better than others, and the people who press for certification are often looking for a "silver bullet" to help point these out. J> So ... who would create these standards? Who would decide on Good, Better, J> and Best? It boggles the mind to think that anybody would even try. There are plenty of folks who'd do it for the pure pleasure of telling you what to do. The essential questions for standards in ANY field are: a. Who creates the standards, b. How are the standards to be enforced, and c. What happens to those who dissent? J> I see recognition of high quality as the way to go, and not certification. The recognition of quality requires mental effort plus the backbone needed to make a judgement. Lots of people would rather rely on a certificate. -- Karl Vogel vogelke@c17.wpafb.af.mil 513-255-3688 Control Data Systems, Inc. ASC/YCOA, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433 The only thing that separates us from the animals is superstition and mindless rituals. --Latke ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 13:52:24 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DStaub11@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Page Ranges Jan wrote, in response to Angela: > >As an index user, I often use the existence of a page range in an entry as a >clue that that is where the most important meat of the discussion is. If I >have: > >2, 79, 200-205, 300 > >to choose from, I will go straight to the 200-205 section first. Me too. I recently looked up something in a software manual and was very frustrated, as I was unable to find the long section I knew must be there. I finally found it by accident (it was indexed only on its first page) and I remember expressing my disgust. So as a user (and someone who doesn't do technical indexing), I am most definitely misled by this practice. > >If presented with subentries for each of these, it negates the clue of the >200-205, but increases the amount I have to look through to find the >significant entry. I would have to think about which way I would prefer to >have it, though.... jump to a page range without much clue as to what is >there, or read through a list of subentries? > If there is a continued discussion, I always indicate this for the reader, and ^also^ break it down into subheadings if appropriate (which depends on: space, how long the range is (anything longer than about 5-6 pages must be broken down, and whether reasonable subheads are creatable). I would hope that we don't have to choose between subentries and page ranges, in other words. Do Mi ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 13:31:10 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Automated indexing and agents compared I just read a brief article in Wired ("My Problem with Agents", Nov, 96, p. 157, by Jaron Lanier) that sounded like a good argument against automated indexing tools (concordance builders and that sort of thing). (Agents are programs that watch what you do and like, and then go out and get you what you want on the web). When you read what he says in this little excerpt, insert "automated indexing tools" for "agents" and see what you think! __________________________ "I'm concerned that agents will be to the Web what commercials were to television: something that seemed like a practical idea but instead made the whole enterprise ugly and stupid." "Supporters say that traditional concerns about user interface will be less important because agents will be smart enough to figure out what we want them to do. This is where I really get scared. I am concerned that people will gradually, and perhaps not even conciously, adjust their lives to make agents appear to be smart. If an agent seems smart, it might really mean that people have dumbed themselves down to make their lives more easily representable by the agent's simple database design." "For an agent to seem autonomous, you have to choose to not look at or understand its guts. If you tweak its guts directly, you're back in the stone age of "direct manipulation." Instead of consciously composing a query - in Alta Vista, say - for the kind of music you want to find, you let the query get constructed automatically by a program that assesses the music you've been listening to. End of quotes___________ What I got out of this is that in order for automated indexers to work, to give you something even close to a good index, you have to dumb down the book. And people would start dumbing down the book unconsciously just in order to make the indexing work. You would have to structure the book and every phrase in it in a way that the automated indexer could interpret. No creative expressions, no metaphors, no synonyms, only clear hierarchies of information. Sounds like a good argument against using them to me..... Jan Wright ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:47:30 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Bonny McLaughlin Subject: Printers Hazel, I use a Hewlett-Packard LaserJet III and I have found no disadvantages for printing indexes. I hear the prices have come down some too. The cartridge life on the InkJet sounds like a big expense. The laser gives me about 5000 sheets per cartridge (I change once a year), and I deal with a firm called The Circle. I call in my order for a cartridge and it comes by Fed Ex in one to two days; they send a prepaid mailing label and I just put the old cartridge in the same box, reseal it, and send it back to them. These recycled cartridges have never given me a problem and they cost $59. That's not much maintenance for a year of printing. The Circle is located in Southern Cal, but they have an 800 number and may service throughout the country. It's worth a call if you should decide on a laser. Bonny McLaughlin mclaughb@cgs.edu ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:51:06 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Carolyn G. Weaver" Subject: Re: Printers, purchasing of In-Reply-To: <199610251835.LAA01294@mx3.u.washington.edu> The inkjet cartridge for my Epson 560 last a LOT longer than 150 pages - more like several thousand. I have no idea what the official lifetime is; but I rarely change cartridges more than every few months or so - including on the Epson 600 in my day-job office - which gets a LOT more business than my home office (used for moonlighting) printer. I buy maybe 4 cartridges a year for indexing use (not counting the ones purchased for my husband and daughters' Epson printers on their 3 Macs!). Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, WA. phone: 206/930-4348 email: cweaver@u.washington.edu CGWeaver@aol.com On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Hazel Blumberg-McKee wrote: > > But before I finish teetering and fall over completely, I'd like to check > with you folks. What kinds of printers are you using? What are the > advantages and disadvantages of lasers and inkjets? What can I purchase > that won't bankrupt me? I am appalled that the inkjet cartridge will > (theoretically) last only 150 pages and then I'll have to cough up $25 or > so for a new one. (I realize there's some way to recycle these.) ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:05:35 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sharon Hughes Subject: Re: Printers, purchasing of At 11:36 AM 10/25/96 -0400, you wrote: >Just this week, it took two full hours for my aged Epson dot-matrix >printer to crank out a 72-page-long index. Yipes! We bought a Epson Color IIs. It had good reviews and the low price was attractive. We don't like it. AND it's slow even in black. I think the 3-4 pages a minute is too slow. I've been borrowing a laser to print final copies and I think we should have gone for a laser in the beginning, I just wanted to print in color..... a weakness. We will get that laser next year. (by the way, the Epson, now 4 months old, has to be sent back for repairs already.. the pickup is free but we will be without it for a week) Sharon ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:04:00 -0500 Reply-To: jdombrow@ngs.org Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Janet Dombrowski Organization: National Geographic Subject: Indexer position available (Washington, DC) Form: Memo Text: (42 lines follow) Cross-posted to INDEX-L, LITA-L, SLAITE-L, WEB4LIB, ASIS-L, = DCLA-L, SLAJOB, and UMCLIS-L. Apologies for duplication. *********************************************************** October 25, 1996 JOB ANNOUNCEMENT: SENIOR INDEXER Job Description: Develops and prepares indexes enabling readers to locate = =0D specific information in National Geographic Society publications (magazines= , = =0D books, television, online, other media). Reviews and corrects indexes of = =0D peers. Does project management on a rotating basis or as needed to create o= r = =0D maintain indexes. Qualifications: Becoming an indexer involves an apprenticeship to learn the= = =0D style of the National Geographic Society. It is very helpful to have a broa= d = =0D liberal education and strong writing/proofreading/communication skills. = =0D Person should be detail oriented and good at synthesis. Skill in WORD, = =0D Cindex, and databases preferred. An MLS is preferred because the Indexing = =0D division is responsible for developing electronic as well as print index = =0D products. Location: 17th and M Street NW, Washington, DC. Salary and Benefits: starts at $25,000; $27,000 for qualified MLS. Includes= = =0D excellent benefits (medical, dental, life insurance, credit union, = =0D retirement plan, tax deferred annuity/thrift savings plan). Closing Date: November 15, 1996 Please send a cover letter describing your interest and qualifications for = =0D this job as well as a resume to Susan Fifer Canby, National Geographic = =0D Society, 1145 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036. *************************************************************** PLEASE _DO NOT_ SEND EMAIL REPLIES TO jdombrow@ngs.org! Thank you. *************************************************************** Use Proportional Font: true Attachment Count: 0 ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 12:42:18 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Victoria Baker Subject: Rural indexers Are there any indexers out there working off of alternative energy sources? I'm planning a move (within a year) to land without standard power and would like to talk with you about it. If you will, please contact me offlist. Thank-you. ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:43:37 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Re: indexing in Word At 10:30 AM 10/25/96 -0600, you wrote: >Given all the problems with Word's indexing feature (yes, I've used it and >PageMaker's indexing feature, too), I wonder what the advantage is at all? None. I'm certainly not learning to do it because there are advantages, only because there is a market that wants it that way. > >The only real use I can think of for the embedded tags is for documents >that are redone every year. That's it. Dick ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 21:30:00 BST-1 Reply-To: jsampson@cix.compulink.co.uk Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: John Sampson Subject: Re: Printers, purchasing of > Just this week, it took two full hours for my aged Epson dot-matrix > printer to crank out a 72-page-long index. Yipes! The printer used to > work > quickly with my old 386, but now that I have a pentium, the printer > works > at the speed of sludge. One thing you might try if you are using Windows 95 is this: Open the Printers folder, right click on the 'printer' icon. Select Properties, then Details, then Spool Settings. Select 'Spool printing after last page is spooled' and 'Start printing after first page is spooled'. Also, set 'Spool data format' to 'RAW'. This worked for me when printing from Word 7. It is a hint from a book called 'Windows 95 is Driving Me Crazy' by Kay Yarborough Nelson (Peachpit Press, California 1996). ISBN 0-201-88626-X _John Sampson_ ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:44:43 EDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "John R. Sullivan" <104146.1652@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Printers I responded privately to Hazel about her printer question, but I wanted to alert anyone else in the market for a new printer that the current ( November 5) issue of PC Magazine has an extensive review of some 37 printers. John Sullivan ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 17:37:53 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Barbara Stroup Subject: encyclopedia indexing Dear Indexers: Can anyone comment on the special requirements and techniques for indexing an encyclopedia (one volume, special topic, young adult type). Barbara Stroup Indexer ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:02:12 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kari Bero Subject: Re: Printers, purchasing of In-Reply-To: <199610251757.MAA21579@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> I've been using an HP DeskJet 500 for nearly 4 years now. I've never had any problems with it. I buy the "double life" cartridges, and they actually last longer than they say. (I hesitate to estimate the number of pages, but I only change it twice a year at most). This printer has been a real trooper - never asking for too much attention, and never whining when I have lots of pages print at once. The only catch is that my cats like to watch the cartridge move around while printing, and when they're being frisky, they dive at it (smudging the ink, and making me growl). Hope the info helps you. -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: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 17:08:58 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sharon Hughes Subject: printers At 11:36 AM 10/25/96 -0400, you wrote: >Just this week, it took two full hours for my aged Epson dot-matrix >printer to crank out a 72-page-long index. Yipes! We bought a Epson Color IIs. It had good reviews and the low price was attractive. We don't like it. AND it's slow even in black. I think the 3-4 pages a minute is too slow. I've been borrowing a laser to print final copies and I think we should have gone for a laser in the beginning, I just wanted to print in color..... a weakness. We will get that laser next year. (by the way, the Epson, now 4 months old, has to be sent back for repairs already.. the pickup is free but we will be without it for a week) Sharon ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:01:19 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Crisis of confidence/postcards At 08:57 AM 10/25/96 -0400, PilarW@AOL.COM wrote: >Your postcard procedure -- what a great idea! >Do you find that you get more feedback from clients this way? Do you >include a stamp on the postcards to help get responses? I'd say I have at least a 75% response rate with the postcard, whereas before I never heard anything....unless something went drastically wrong (i.e., the package was missing in the mail). And yes, I do put a stamp on the card, so all the editor has to do is drop it in the outgoing mailbox. A small added benefit is that many editors comment on the card itself...what a great idea it is, and so on. And that can't help but keep my name a little fresher in their minds when the next job comes up. >BTW, when it comes to holding old pp proofs, I usually hang on to them >until I get paid for the job. You must have either more storage space than I do...or fewer stacks of old proofs! Several things got me going on this project, and not the least of them was the stacks of paper I had accumulated. I index a set of tax books for accountants (about 3000 pages) every year, and I usually end up with more like 6000 pages because I get first- and second-stage proofs. So this amounts to a MOUND of paper! When our trash company finally initiated recycling of office paper, I was delighted...but I needed to know it was safe to put the stuff out at the curb. And then of course I did have one case where I inadvertently tossed a stack of master pages (not my fault, but scary). =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:01:25 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Printers, purchasing of At 11:36 AM 10/25/96 -0400, Hazel Blumberg-McKee wrote: >Obviously, a new printer is in order. I've read *Consumer Reports*. I've >gone to stores and hunted around. I'm teetering on the brink of purchasing >a Hewlett-Packard inkjet printer that costs about $179 and prints three to >four pages per minute in black and white. > >But before I finish teetering and fall over completely, I'd like to check >with you folks. What kinds of printers are you using? What are the >advantages and disadvantages of lasers and inkjets? What can I purchase >that won't bankrupt me? I am appalled that the inkjet cartridge will >(theoretically) last only 150 pages and then I'll have to cough up $25 or >so for a new one. (I realize there's some way to recycle these.) If you have at least $300 to invest, buy a laser printer. They are workhorses that will last, essentially, a lifetime...probably longer than your computer! The print is peerless, and the speed is certainly reasonable (anywhere from 4-8 ppm). HP lasers are the creme-de-la-creme, but almost every laser would be an excellent purchase. Failing that, an inkjet or bubblejet is very adequate for most purposes. You can get up to 300 dpi print quality (perfect for both letters and indexes), and all the bells and whistles you really need. I just bought my husband a Canon bubblejet for the astonishingly good price of $108 from a site on the Web. For $3 shipping (and NO sales tax), it arrived four days later in perfect condition and works like a charm. His needs are about in the same league as yours, except that you'll print a higher quantity of paper at a time. You don't need fancy graphics capabilities, or color printing, or 1000 dpi quality. I'm as horrified as you must be over the 150-page limit on the cartridge, however. Are you sure there isn't some error somewhere? And you are right, they sell kits to refill the cartridges for a minimal amount of money. Mot people I know reuse their ink cartridges a number of times this way, and it works out great. Very economical, as well. =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 18:05:36 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Erika Millen Subject: indexing in Word >The only real use I can think of for the embedded tags is for documents >that are redone every year. Maybe I'm missing something, though. Nope, you're not missing anything. :-) That's exactly our problem. A lot of our books are updated every few months and released as new editions, so it's important to the company that the indexing codes stay embedded in the text files. Erika Indianapolis, IN ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 22:33:28 UT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Joanne Clendenen Subject: Re: Indexer Certifcation Hi, everyone, Victoria Baker wrote: <> As the writer, along with Linda Fetters, of the Key Words index, I was intrigued by your post. Allow me to use this opportunity to plug the index, for those pack rats who keep all their copies of the ASI newsletter and Key Words. Actually, we probably need to update the index, but I think ASI is reluctant to do so if demand for the original is low. Anyway, the appropriate line from the index reads: certification of indexers, debate, 1(3): 1, 4-6, 1(4): 16, 1(5): 1, 5-9, 21 Joanne Clendenen J_Clendenen@msn.com ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:29:25 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Sending files electronically At 12:20 PM 10/25/96 -0400, JPerlman@AOL.COM wrote: >While I think the postcard is a lovely idea, you wait to receive the >confirmation, which doesn't help if there is a deadline situation. I >prefer to make the phone call and ensure that my client is satisfied. The >$1 or so cost for a brief phone conversation is worth it to me. Janet, I'd do the same thing, if I were submitting via email. With a paper-and-disk index, though, the deadline is never as critical as "noon today." I have to get the index to the editor on, say October 30, and I'd assume that if it wasn't on his or her desk that day, I'd get a call. So the purpose of my postcard isn't so much to assure that delivery has occurred (I'm sure I would hear about it if it did not), but to find out what's to be done with proofs, and secondarily to obtain some feedback about the work itself. Of course, the mere receipt of the card does tell me the index arrived...otherwise, the editor wouldn't have the card! =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:12:19 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Victoria Baker Subject: Proofs, storage of The standard of the industry is to hold on to proofs for one year minimum, for all the various reasons we've stated (and others). Whether this applies to indexers or freelancers in general is unclear to me. Perhaps there are readers of the list who are positioned to know if any areas of publishing have a general preference about the disposition of freelancers' copies of proofs? Since many of us mark up our copy, it surprised me to discover that some publishers do want their proofs back. Some for reasons of copyright/privacy, or because there were pe's/ea's I'd caught and the pub. wanted to see the pages; one wants them back because they're trying to save paper usage and they are able to use my proofs to further the book's process(!). I try to ask when I'm setting up the job because while I don't generally mark the pages for indexing terms, I do use them as I'm going along for scratch notes on the process. If I must return the proofs I make my notes on large or small post-it type notes attached to the pages. I don't reckon anyone who marks their proofs would feel comfortable returning them; frankly, it was early requests to return them combined with my own processual needs (plus Macrex's editing mode) that convinced me to stop marking. Best, Victoria ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 16:12:24 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Victoria Baker Subject: Re: Page ranges In my admittedly very limited experience indexing computer software I was horrified to be restricted in these two ways: 1) No page ranges allowed 2) Only one cross-reference type allowed, therefore no _See also_ in index I was told this was related to the (Framemaker) software that my index would be keyed into after I delivered it. I found I couldn't work under those restrictions (we all have our limits, and they vary), so I stopped seeking work in the field. This is another aspect of my concerns about desktop publishing: The publishing software is written; books and their ancillary materials conform to whatever limitations are imposed thereby.* The limitations of reproductive technologies don't seem to me to be good reasons to change indexing standards. Desktop technologies have been here less than twenty years; indexing technologies developed over many hundreds of years. Publishing software develops as a function of the market--I hope we as indexers will help create a market demand for products that serve the needs of information distribution. In the case of embedded indexes, fewer hierarchies and less complete page ranges don't, to my mind, achieve that end. Best, Victoria * _see also_ Jan Wright's "automated indexing..." post of 10/25/96 ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 20:51:26 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: indexing in Word In a message dated 96-10-25 14:47:20 EDT, you write: > The only real use I can think of for the embedded tags is for documents > that are redone every year. Maybe I'm missing something, though. > One big benefit is translation - when a book or manual is translated, the pagination changes, so the index not only has to be translated but also completely redone for page break problems. Embedding removes at least the page number problem for the translators. Also, there are groups who write books who cannot get things set enough to break their pages until the gruesome end of the project who really prefer to have embedded tags. That way they can change and change and change and change all they want. Unfortunately, they are usually the same groups who don't have the time to let you have the files to do a good indexing job. When I explain how long it will take, they either seriously think about breaking pages earlier, or let me index in Cindex and embed it all later at the end. jan Wright ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 22:13:44 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Proofs, storage of Victoria, When I worked in house at HBJ as a production editor, we did "morgue" all proofs and manuscripts for a year or so. However, we never expected our freelancers to keep anything for that period of time. Anything that we wanted to keep we requested back from the freelancers. And we *never* requested the indexer to return proof. We only wanted indexers to keep proof long enough to answer questions (if we had any). Then they could do what they wished with it. I have been asked to return proof once, and I was suspicious of the publisher at the time. I truly wondered if they wanted to see how I had done it and could they reuse my marked pages to do the index again the next year. It was a yearly edition with few changes and the first time the publisher had decided to index it. I still wonder about it. As it turned out, I passed the job along and have not indexed for the company since. I'm not really sorry about it either, to tell the truth. The subject matter was the dryest. Anyway, I hope that helps somehow. Leslie Leslie Leland Frank Editorial Services ================================================================= ======== Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 20:54:26 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Sachs Subject: Re: Automated indexing and agents compared >What I got out of this is that in order for automated indexers to work, to >give you something even close to a good index, you have to dumb down the >book. And people would start dumbing down the book unconsciously just in >order to make the indexing work. To me, this sounds like the argument that pocket calculators are bad because people will grow to depend on them and forget how to calculate, or bicycles are bad because people will grow to depend on them and forget how to walk. If I recall correctly, Socrates considered books to be bad because people would grow to depend on them and forget how to recite from memory. The argument that a tool is inherently bad because it will make people to forget how to work without it carries no weight by itself because it applies to EVERY tool. There must be some demonstration of why the harm, in the case of a particular tool, is especially probable or especially serious. The writer touches on that with the statement that he's "concerned that people will gradually, and perhaps not even conciously, adjust their lives to make agents appear to be smart." But unless something important was left out of the quotation, he offers no objective basis for his concern. It sounds like he's really worried about the tendency many people have to use one reference tool, or one type of tool, to the exclusion of others: "It isn't in the Encyclopedia Britannica (or in Yahoo, or in the college library's catalog), therefore it doesn't exist." That's a real problem, but hardly a new one. Jonathan Sachs Sand River Software, Inc. ================================================================= ======== Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 09:54:48 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Indexer Certification At 10:42 AM 10/25/96 -0400, JPerlman@AOL.COM wrote: >Friends, > >Please excuse if the following message is a duplicate posting. My original >transmission came back to me with a mail failure" message, so I am >re-posting. Jane,t I too have been getting "mail failure" messages and thinking a post hasn't made it to the list. Are you using the non-Bitnet address for these so-called "failed posts"? I am, and it seems that the address causes the mail system to think there has been a failure...because there is no main addressee and only a "cc" address. However, the "cc" address posts HAVE been getting through. Anybody else experiencing this problem? =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 13:48:22 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Mail failure. I'm getting these too. I sent a note to Charlotte this morning. Dick ================================================================= ======== Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 13:23:08 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sarah Smith Subject: Re: Automated indexing and agents compared Someone (sorry, I don't have the original attribution) said: >>What I got out of this is that in order for automated indexers to work, to >>give you something even close to a good index, you have to dumb down the >>book. And people would start dumbing down the book unconsciously just in >>order to make the indexing work. Jonathan Sachs replied: >To me, this sounds like the argument that pocket calculators are bad because >people will grow to depend on them and forget how to calculate, or bicycles >are bad because people will grow to depend on them and forget how to walk. [polite snippage] I read it that way at first, but it looks like there's a slightly different shade of meaning here. The argument didn't seem to be that using automated indexes would lead to too much reliance on them, followed by the atrophying of the parts of our brains we use for indexing. :) It seems like they are saying, more specifically, that a person writing a book (let's say), while knowing that it will be indexed with that type of automated tool, might phrase the sentences in such a way that it would be easier for the tool to work. In other words, the top question in the author's mind might cease to be "Is this the best way for me to phrase this for the book's topic and intended audience?" and begin to be "Is this the best way to phrase it so the automated indexing tool will pick it up?" I'm not sure if this would necessarily "dumb down" the book, but it might make it less pleasing to read. -- Sarah Allen Smith (stepping out of the Lurkers' Corner to make her first post), Lawrence, Kansas ================================================================= ======== Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 14:50:17 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Julia B. Marshall" Subject: Embedded Indexing Was: indexing in Word In-Reply-To: <199610260324.XAA25353@cap1.CapAccess.org> Dear Collective Wisdom From the postings that I've been seeing, it sounds as if embedded indexing is a fairly common practice. How much embedded indexing do y'all do in Word, Framemaker, Pagemaker etc.? Can you do the indexing in a dedicated indexing program and import it to the embedded program? Are their kinds of projects (I remember seeing the postings for regularly updated works) for which embedded indexing is more useful than others? Curiouser and curiouser. TIA Regards Julia Marshall juliam@capaccess.org ================================================================= ======== Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 15:18:34 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Pmauer@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Indexing with Word 7 In a message dated 96-10-24 20:35:45 EDT, you write: << I always create the index first in dedicated indexing software, print it out in page-number order, and then find someone (hopefully at the client company) to embed the index. >> I agree; I almost always create the index first in dedicated indexing software, and then embed the index in MS Word. I do technical writing as well as indexing, and I was recently asked to create an index for a user's manual; I didn't write the user's manual but I did write the service documentation for the same product, so I was very familiar with the product. In this case, I wrote the embedded index for this small user's manual without writing it in dedicated indexing software first. Sometimes it requires more editing, but when I'm working at the customer's site and don't have my dedicated indexing software available, it can be done. I'm finding more and demand for embedded indexes in MS Word. I recently received a call from a publisher who wanted me to embed an index in Word for a manual for him within 2 weeks (I've forgotten the size, but I think it was *at least* 250 pages). Right off the bat, he asked me my rates. I told him that I really needed to see a chapter of the manual before I could quote a rate. He persisted, "well, what do you usually charge?" I said that my rates range from $3.00 to $5.00 a page, but that depended on how technical the material is, how large/small the pages are, how large/small the font is, etc. He huffed, "well I've never paid that much; I've never paid more than $2.00 a page." I said, "well, I'm afraid that you'll have a tough time finding a professional indexer who is willing to work for less than $2.00 a page, especially for an embedded index." He was obviously too huffy to talk to at this point, so I wished him good luck and offered to talk more if he still needed an embedded index. I admit that I was steamed by the end of the conversation too. It seems that people are willing to pay lawyers $100/hour (or whatever they charge), plumbers and electricians $50/hour, but not willing to pay professional indexers what they're worth. I was glad that we had recently discussed rates on this listserv, and how we should stick to our guns about our rates. I wonder if this guy ever found anyone to write an embedded index for a $2.00/page. Peg Mauer ================================================================= ======== Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 13:09:00 PDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: W: Incorrect or incomplete address field found and ignored. From: Patricia Buchanan Subject: Printers About two years ago, a computer magazine (?PC World) compared a wide variety of printers - big business, small business, just home use. One of the winners in the small business category for laser printers was the Brother HL-630. I bought this about two years ago and am extremely pleased with it. Each cartridge costs about $39 (Canadian - so around $26 US) and seems to last about 2000-3000 sheets. The printing is clear and crisp - and it prints about 5-6 pages a minute. It has a straight paper path that minimizes paper jams. At the time, the printer cost $500 Cdn; this is obviously less in US funds and the price has probably fallen, just like the rest of computer equipment. There was also an Okidata in the same price range that was highly recommended. Hope this helps - it is just my personal experience but it has borne out the magazine's recommendation. Patricia ___________________ Patricia Buchanan nero@islandnet.com (604) 656-3612 or 656-1612 ================================================================= ======== Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:43:01 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Automated indexing and agents compared In a message dated 96-10-26 04:15:46 EDT, Jonathan writes > To me, this sounds like the argument that pocket calculators are bad because > people will grow to depend on them and forget how to calculate, or bicycles > are bad because people will grow to depend on them and forget how to walk. Bicycles work, as do pocket calculators. Bicycles are best used in certain environments, on certain environments, under certain weather conditions. Only a very few folks insist on using them everywhere for every kind of transportation need, as some of us either don't have the lung power to use them everywhere, or may have 8 feet of snow laying out there to deal with. So applying this metaphor to automated indexing tools, they can be used and used well for certain publications that are structured to work well with them, under certain conditions. But to think that they work on every book and do a good job is like asking me to bike from Seattle to Mt. Rainier - I would get wet, and would have a much better time in a car, which would make it a better trip. For me the trip quality, the index quality, is the main thing. The pocket calculator comparison is also interesting. Classic case of not understanding what's going on behind the interface, which is further addressed in the Wired article. If people do not know basic math abilities and rely on them totally, it's bad news for thinking power. Has this Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 20:44:42 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9610D" To: Julius Ariail happened? Have people lost some basic skills? Unfortunately, I see enough of the papers and projects my husband brings home to grade to know that basic thinking skills are in serious trouble right now. In "The Age of Missing Information", Bill McKibben argues that we have lost a lot of them, due to a combination of shorter attentions spans from the fast-paced TV and sound-bite emphasis, and on a drift away from deep understanding of any one topic. (A really interesting book, by the way). Applying this to indexing tools means that if you use the tool and don't know the process, you get what the tool thinks you should, and you don't have the skill to evaluate it on your own. So what all this says to me is that tools should be used in the environments they are good in, bikes on nice days on the bike trail, and automated indexing tools on pieces structured and written for it, and embedded indexing tools on translation-bound and ever-changing pieces. But it also says we should not give up the understanding of what goes on inside the tool, lest we lose the ability to do it on our own, better, when conditions are wrong for the tool, which they so often are. When the chain falls off, when the battery dies, or when they just don't work right in the situation. Or lest we lose the ability to figure out how to make the tool do what WE want, not what it thinks we want. Or lest we lose the ability to make the tool better, by truly understanding what it should be doing. Jan ================================================================= ======== Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 00:24:53 UT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Joanne Clendenen Subject: Re: Mail Failures Me three, or four or whatever! I never used to have trouble sending mail to INDEX-L, but I did yesterday and the day before. First I did a reply to, which used the bitnet address, and that failed. Then I started a new message using the .edu address, but that failed too. Anyone know what's causing this? Joanne Clendenen ================================================================= ======== Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 23:17:44 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: KINGH@SNYSYRV1.BITNET Subject: An interesting alternative to doing your own back-ups! From: IN%"network-l@mail.io.org" 20-OCT-1996 10:59:45.27 To: IN%"network-l@mail.io.org" CC: Subj: Network-l: Remote back-up service Return-path: Received: from post.io.org by VAX.CS.HSCSYR.EDU (PMDF V4.3-12 #11626) id <01IAV3JJ4GG08ZKRGI@VAX.CS.HSCSYR.EDU>; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 10:59:40 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by post.io.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA04498 for network-l-outgoing; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 10:54:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from io.org (io.org [198.133.36.1]) by post.io.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA04493 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 10:54:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from GPO.iol.ie (GPO.iol.ie [194.125.2.239]) by io.org (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA25751 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 10:54:33 -0400 Received: from LOCALNAME (dialup-069.cork.iol.ie [194.125.43.69]) by GPO.iol.ie Sendmail(v8.7.6) with SMTP id PAA29138 for ; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:54:06 +0100 (BST) Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:54:06 +0100 (BST) From: Eoin O'Leary Subject: Network-l: Remote back-up service Sender: owner-network-l@io.org X-Sender: elo@gpo.iol.ie To: network-l@mail.io.org Reply-to: network-l@mail.io.org Message-id: <199610201454.PAA29138@GPO.iol.ie> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Precedence: bulk Hi everyone, I found a Remote back-up service that is much cheaper than buying your own back-up hardware and they store your data offsite, if it of interest to anyone it is at http://darrington.net/~ginger best regards, Eoin. ================================================================= ======== Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 01:45:31 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Rates (was Indexing with Word 7) Peg, Congratulations on sticking to your guns regarding rates with this misguided individual. I know how much grit that takes. My feeling is that one's ability and desire to do just this kind of thing when negotiating rates will make the difference between being able to earn a living, and a good living, as a free-lancer, and just getting by. This is one of the answers to all those indexers and potential indexers who ask if it is possible to make a living as an indexer, or who wonder why others seem to earn well and they just "get by". The answer is that it's an uphill, constant fight, to be paid a rate that is commensurate with the experience we have, the expertise we can demonstrate, and the intellectual effort it takes to do our jobs. The more we give in, the more our earnings will remain depressed. And, unfortunately, that affects our clients' perceptions of what the industry commands as a rate. The more we fight for a reasonable, professional rate, the better for our profession, and the better our earnings. Let me say as an aside that it is understandable for a new indexer to accept jobs at a somewhat lower rate, due to extreme hunger, and to a feeling that they lack experience and so therefore cannot command high rates. It is understandable at first ... as long as the practice doesn't continue well past the "new indexer" stage. Once experienced and credentialed, we must not undersell ourselves. I'm glad you did that during negotiation. You can be an inspiration to all those who have capitulated and worked "on the cheap." Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 09:35:16 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Truesdale Subject: Re: new printer Hi Hazel -- glad you're still here. I recently pruchased a HP Laserjet 5L printer. I chose HP partly because of their reputation for good support and service. I had some problems with the driver software (it was too fancy for my laptop to digest). I called software support and was on hold for less than 5 min. Previous experience with free software support lines had led me to expect at least a 20 min. wait! Help was efficient and courteous. I like the printer, altho cost was near $500. I understand the laserjet's printing will smear when fresh and if gotten wet. A cartridge for my printer runs about $70 and I believe will print about 2500 copies, while yours will come to about $416 per 500 copies!?? Surely that can't be right? -- Ann Truesdale (Anntrue@ix.netcom.com) Yonges Island, SC Definition of insanity: Continuing to do the same thing and expecting to get different results ================================================================= ======== Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 07:24:26 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: new printer At 09:35 AM 10/27/96 -0800, Ann Truesdale wrote: > I like the printer, altho cost was near $500. I understand the > laserjet's printing will smear when fresh and if gotten wet. A cartridge > for my printer runs about $70 and I believe will print about 2500 > copies, while yours will come to about $416 per 500 copies!?? Surely that > can't be right? No, I think you got that reversed. It's INKJET printing that can smear when wet...laserjets don't use liquid ink, so there is no smearing even when the page is fresh out of the printer. (And I've spilled water on a laser-printed page with no special problems.) =Sonsie= ================================================================= ======== Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 11:35:32 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Pmauer@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Embedded Indexing Was: indexing in Word In a message dated 96-10-27 00:38:06 EDT, you write: << How much embedded indexing do y'all do in Word, Framemaker, Pagemaker etc.? Can you do the indexing in a dedicated indexing program and import it to the embedded program? Are their kinds of projects (I remember seeing the postings for regularly updated works) for which embedded indexing is more useful than others? >> Julia, I'm finding more and more demand for embedded indexes--maybe because I write a lot of indexes for computer-related manuals which are updated often. Also, the client may want to take over the maintenance of the manual, and an embedded index is easier to update when they move a paragraph from here to there, add a chapter, etc. No, you can't import an index from a dedicated indexing program into the program because the index would just be a text file, and the embedded index entries are actually entered as invisible text in the body of the document, not just a text file at the end of the document. Embedded indexes are required more in technical manuals than in books that publishers produce. Maybe publishers will someday require more embedded indexes because an author plans to update a biography and therefore wants indexes embedded, but it's not so likely as technical and computer-related manuals. Just my humble opinion. Peg Mauer Communication Link Technical Writing, Indexing, Editing, Research ================================================================= ======== Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 12:37:53 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Embedded Indexing Was: indexing in Word In a message dated 96-10-27 00:38:06 EDT, Julia writes > How much embedded indexing do > y'all do in Word, Framemaker, Pagemaker etc.? Can you do the indexing in > a dedicated indexing program and import it to the embedded program? Are > their kinds of projects (I remember seeing the postings for regularly > updated works) for which embedded indexing is more useful than others? I have only two clients who accept standalone indexes right now. The rest want embedded or online indexes (or both, or both together from a single source). Frightening, eh, but I do work mostly in the software industry. I have figured out a way to index in Cindex, build a final index, export it into Word, place the index structure into PageMaker, and then tag the pages to each entry, which saves retyping each entry, but is still a pain. I don't tag in Word files and then import them, as you lose page ranging and third level heads. I would love to have more clients who took simple standalone indexes, as they are very relaxing compared to the embedded ones. Time constraints, longer times needed to code the index, equipment concerns, software versions, installed fonts and resulting page display problems, corrupted index tags, file transfer, large graphics, index compile problems, limited index formatting choices, all make embedded indexing a very complex process. (Would you believe that a potential client once asked for embedded indexing at a rate of $2.00 per page? Ah, think I'll pass, thank you....) Reasons why embedded indexes are desired? --- A lot of the manuals I work on are translated into 10-25 languages. When you translate a book, the page breaks change. For example, a chapter in German is usually 1/3 longer than it is in English. So a standalone index would not only have to be translated, but also have each page number checked and changed. Repeat 10 times and call me in the morning. --- A lot of the print manuals I work on are going to be repurposed into online material, such as a PDF file. A PDF file will have an interactive index if you build the file in PageMaker, index it in PageMaker, and then convert it. Frame has a similar feature for building its own online files with interactive indexing. --- A lot of other groups can't set their page breaks due to the ever changing nature of the products they work on. For them, embedding is the only way they will get any kind of index for the piece, as they can't stop tweaking the content long enough to break pages for a standalone piece. --- If a book is going to be reworked and rereleased often, such as hardware descriptions for a company's product line, embedded entries would allow the piece to be easily updated without reindexing the unchanging parts. You would just add indexing for the new parts, check it against the existing indexing, and go. You wouldn't have to change all the page numbers. As much as I find Cindex's page number changing macros really useful, most books don't change by the whole page. They get inserted paragraphs here, 2 1/2 page chunks there, and stuff moved around and rearranged, never a whole page at a time. Checking all that for changed pages is a pain if you have to do it alot. Jan wright ================================================================= ======== Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 16:21:29 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Indexing: Who pays? (also proofreading) Here's a posting from Copyediting-L about indexing. We're not the only ones who're concerned about index quality. (Vickie West gave permission to be quoted on Index-L.) Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) sign that your cat has learned your Internet password: hate-mail messages to Apple Computer Corp. about its release of "CyberDog" ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:09:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee To: Copy Editors and Editing Subject: Indexing: Who pays? On Thu, 24 Oct 1996, Vickie West wrote: > I've worked for at least one small nonfic pub that had authors proof > and index their own books or pay for these services out of their > royalties--so, of course, most of the authors did these chores > themselves. I'm not sure this excuses the larger publishers, though. I'm a freelancer, and my work is pretty evenly divided between editing and indexing. I work for both large and small publishers, and when it comes to the index, (a) the authors have to pay themselves, either upfront or out of royalties; (b) the authors pay half and the presses pay half; or (c) the presses pay for the index. (C) is extremely rare, I've found, even with large publishers. So, the authors frequently attempt the task themselves. I don't know how many calls I've received from frantic authors: "I just can't do it! Please help!" Or an editor will call and tell me that the author was *supposed* to have written the index himself or herself but ran in terror from the task at the last minute. I wish that more presses would pay for the index to books. An utterly useless index can truly make an otherwise good book well-nigh impossible to use. Does anyone still get proofreading jobs? I used to do a lot of proofreading, a task I love. But lately, I haven't had any proofreading jobs cross my desk. And when I read a book for fun, I often end up wincing at how many errors I find, errors that should have been caught in the proofreading phase. Maybe there simply *isn't* a proofreading phase any longer. > Anyway, the problem is that authors aren't experienced proofers > and don't know what to look for in galleys or page proofs. So, among > other things, erratic running heads, weird punctuation in bibliographies, > and line-break and alignment oddities go untouched. Also, it's > difficult to proof text that you've written yourself; in the past, I've > noticed that authors nearly always overlook the copyeditor's misses > (hey, if it ain't marked, it must be okay). So, no matter how swell > a job you did editing, a bad proofing job can make you look like a > right nit. Vickie, I hope that publishers and authors are reading your posting! This paragraph should be printed out and sent hither, thither, and yon. I'll clamber down off my soapbox now. Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) sign that your cat has learned your Internet password: hate-mail messages to Apple Computer Corp. about its release of "CyberDog" ================================================================= ======== Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 17:58:35 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: "dumbing down" the book In a message dated 96-10-27 06:50:43 EST, you write: > In other words, the top question in the author's mind might cease to >be "Is this the best way for me to phrase this for the book's topic and >intended audience?" and begin to be "Is this the best way to phrase it so >the automated indexing tool will pick it up?" I'm not sure if this would >necessarily "dumb down" the book, but it might make it less pleasing to read. This thread reminds me of one on the technical writing list a week or two ago, about writing for translation -- one tech writer said that metaphors should be minimized or eliminated because of the difficulty of translating them, and a translator wrote back something like "No! No! You're trying to make our job even duller! Please, let *us* worry about whether the metaphor is translatable." I have since unsubscribed from TECHWR-L, since that was the brightest spot in several weeks' worth of postings for me. Helen Schinske HSchinske@aol.com ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 08:28:38 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: SeIndex@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Indexing with Word 7 Dick, I would live to try this, could you provide me with some more info. such that I can give a good try and report back to you with my results. Also, if this seems to be a feasible method (at least for some projects), what are the chances of getting projects given to you in Word 7 compatible format; just request an RTF file, and/or would you be willing (assuming this is economically feasible) to scan hardcopy? Verrrrrrry Interesting!!!! Sue Evans ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 08:46:30 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Printers Thank you so much to everybody who wrote to me privately and to Index-L about printers. Your words of wisdom have been incredibly helpful. I'm leaning toward a HP laser printer now, rather than an inkjet. Once the budget's in shape (may be a while; we seem to've spent the year having kittens neutered and spayed ;-} ), a new printer will materialize in my very office. You people are terrific! Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) sign that your cat has learned your Internet password: hate-mail messages to Apple Computer Corp. about its release of "CyberDog" ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 09:35:48 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Page ranges In a message dated 96-10-25 19:35:28 EDT, you write: > In my admittedly very limited experience indexing computer software I was > horrified to be restricted in these two ways: > > 1) No page ranges allowed > 2) Only one cross-reference type allowed, therefore no _See also_ in index > > I was told this was related to the (Framemaker) software that my index would > be keyed into after I delivered it. I found I couldn't work under those > restrictions (we all have our limits, and they vary), so I stopped seeking > work in the field. Victoria, Aiiiish! These folks didn't seem to know how to use FrameMaker's indexing module. Just for future reference, page ranges can be created in FrameMaker (as I described in another post) and you can definitely create "See also" refs, in addition to "See" refs. In fact, you can use any text you want for cross references and in any format. The reason is that FrameMaker is so totally brain-dead about cross-references that it is easy to "fake it out". Of course, the fact that it is brain-dead in this respect also means that you must manually merge them and manually check them. (This is yet another reason for creating the index in dedicated indexing software first, so your cross-references are automatically checked and merged for you. Then, it's just a matter of embedding them exactly as they appear in your page-order sort.) I just hate to see you abandon marketing to the software industry, just because of that one ignorant company (or individual). > > This is another aspect of my concerns about desktop publishing: The > publishing software is written; books and their ancillary materials conform > to whatever limitations are imposed thereby.* The limitations of > reproductive technologies don't seem to me to be good reasons to change > indexing standards. Desktop technologies have been here less than twenty > years; indexing technologies developed over many hundreds of years. > Publishing software develops as a function of the market--I hope we as > indexers will help create a market demand for products that serve the needs > of information distribution. In the case of embedded indexes, fewer > hierarchies and less complete page ranges don't, to my mind, achieve that > end. I agree with you 100%!!! If I remember correctly, Nancy Mulvany wrote an excellent paper on this very issue. One limitation that I've run up against with embedding in MS Word documents is that there is no way to force the sort order in Word. So, if you have a subentry that absolutely requires a leading preposition for clarity... oh well... it's just going to sort on that darn preposition and there's nothing that can be done about it. In FrameMaker, BTW, you can force the sort order for subentries and main entries, though it's a pain. (Adobe, who bought Frame Technology, still hasn't paid me for any of these favorable comments, BTW. ;-D) As for heading levels, I think you can go down to seven in FrameMaker and Word (though I haven't been tempted to). The limitation in FrameMaker, regardless of the number of heading levels allowed, is the limit on the maximum number of characters allowed in one index marker--256--I think. (I know this post is full of "I think"s, but I've been deadline crunching for the last few weeks and my mind is foggy. Now, ask me about earwax phenotypes, and it'll be another story. ;-D) Anyway, I've digressed. I once bent the ear of a support technician at Microsoft about their stone-and-chisel indexing module, but surely there is a better way we indexers can LOUDLY convey our needs to the software publishers. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 09:51:37 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Daveream@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Indexer certification? The latest newsletter for the DC/MD/VA Chapter has an editorial about this. Maybe it could be posted to Index-L by someone in that region. Dave Ream ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:15:08 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Laura M. Gottlieb" Subject: Crises of confidence >Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:21:24 -0600 >To: index-l@bingvmb.cc.binghamton.edu >From: "Laura M. Gottlieb" >Subject: Crises of confidence > >25 October 1996 > >One strategy I have used--in lieu of feedback from publishers on the quality of my indexing work--is to compare the index I submitted to the index that's published in the book. Comparing them made me see what kinds of changes editors made to my index, and sometimes made me understand why. I don't really know how valid the conclusions are that one might draw from such an exercise (has the editor cut out certain things because of space limitations or because she/he found them superfluous?), and I have no idea of how knowledgable editors are about indexing (so are they valid judges of indexex?), but I *have* found it useful to see what they look for and what they rule out. And several times, unfortunately, I've found mistakes that *they've* introduced into the printed version! > >Laura Moss Gottlieb >Freelance Indexer > Laura Moss Gottlieb Freelance Indexer 212 Highland Avenue Madison, Wisconsin 53705 (608) 233-4559 pgottlie@facstaff.wisc.edu ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 09:03:27 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: Re: Page Ranges Lynn wrote: >I had a client for which I didn't have to actually embed, but had to provide >a page order sort of the index so that someone on their end could actually do >the embedding. (This was really cute because I had to cut up slips of paper >containing the entries for each page and paste the paper onto the page, then >draw arrows from the entries to the points in the text where they were >supposed to go. And I had to do it for 27 books, including a 1200-pager! >Needless to say, I trained my mother and husband how to do the paste-up so I >could concentrate on other things, like actually indexing. ;-D) I had a similar experience, but instead of cutting and pasting, I printed out the page-order index with line numbers (any word processor can do this, or it can be done from the indexing program), and then put the line number in a circle at the appropriate place in the index, so the company's employee could do the actual embedding. Elinor Lindheimer elinorl@mcn.org ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 09:08:44 +0000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Sachs Subject: Re: Automated indexing and agents compared >So what all this says to me is that... we >should not give up the understanding of what goes on inside the tool, lest we >lose the ability to do it on our own, better, when conditions are wrong for >the tool, which they so often are. Hear, hear. After thinking about this some more, I realized that while I'm not concerned that using certain types of tools will dumb us down, I'm very concerned that the particular tools we use often are designed to do so. Microsoft, is most of its recent software design efforts, has been the worst major offender. The Windows 95 interface is full of examples. Item: the Explorer is set up to hide the extension of any file whose type the Explorer recognizes. For example, BONEHEAD.EXE appears as just plain BONEHEAD, because the Explorer knows it's an executable file, and displays an appropriate icon that is supposed to tell you what type of file this is more clearly than EXE would. (More clearly, that is, if you're functionally illiterate.) The problem arises when a directory contains eight BONEHEAD files with different recognized extensions, and you have to puzzle out which is which from a bunch of cryptic icons. It's possible to make the Explorer display extensions, but you have to be a novice-level Windows 95 guru to do it. How much easier this would be if Microsoft didn't try to make things easy! Jonathan Sachs Sand River Software, Inc. ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 13:36:39 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Re: Infomaniac (fwd. and long) Infomaniac? Hmmm...read on... The following message is being forwarded from AUTOCAT, with the permission of Chuck Bearden. The discussion there has centered around the term "infomaniac" versus librarian. The first part of the response is to someone who apparently defined infomaniac. The second part of the message discusses the need for indexing of a certain type on the Web. Chuck says he would like to hear from any indexers who may have other ideas about indexing and the Web. >Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 11:16:09 -0400 >Reply-To: "AUTOCAT: Library cataloging and authorities discussion group" > , >From: Chuck Bearden >Subject: Re: Infomaniac >To: Multiple recipients of list AUTOCAT > >I like your distinction between the infomaniac and the librarian: >the librarian is skilled not only at finding information >themselves, but also in making it more findable and usable for >non-librarians > >But I wonder if perhaps the WWW problem lies more with the lack >of consistent indexing terms and access points for the documents >themselves, rather than with search engines. The search engines >don't have consistent enough material to work with to produce >consistent results, be they ever so cleverly written to choose >what to index. > >I see two chief options: (a) intelligent agents, which putatively >can assess relevance of natural language documents to a usable >degree, and (b) the more traditional librarian's approach of >application of controlled vocabulary and access points to >documents, combined with bibliographic instruction for the users. >Not that these exclude each other by any means. But what we are >aiming at in any case is enabling our users to make as complete >and precise a retrieval of relevant documents as possible. > >Chuck > >------------------------------------------------------------- >Chuck Bearden email: cbearden@hpl.lib.tx.us >Catalog Department voice: 713/247-3499 >Houston Public Library fax: 713/247-3158 >500 McKinney Ave. >Houston, TX 77002 -=> NOT SPEAKING FOR HPL <=- >------------------------------------------------------------- > -=>HPL's Homepage: http://sparc.hpl.lib.tx.us<=- ************ Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:36:33 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: Re: Embedded indexing and rates Pag Mauer wrote: >It seems that people are willing to pay lawyers $100/hour (or whatever they charge), plumbers and electricians $50/hour, but not willing to pay professional indexers what they're worth. I was glad that we had recently discussed rates on this listserv, and how we should stick to our guns about our rates. I wonder if this guy ever found anyone to write an embedded index for a $2.00/page. > This is the type of indexing for which I have always charged by the hour--the last time it was $35. It's technical writing, after all--so similar rates should apply. Elinor Lindheimer elinorl@mcn.org ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 14:08:46 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Sending files electronically In a message dated 96-10-25 13:35:29 EDT, Janet wrote: > You can imagine my horror when I > received a panicky phone call at 1 PM from my client to inquire if the file > had been sent yet. He had never received it! Of course, I emailed the file > again, and called him to be certain he got it. All was OK, and that was the > end of that. A follow-up phone call on Monday revealed that the errant > first > email message and file was never received! > > So the moral of the story is that messages (and files) do get lost in > cyberspace, and you can never be certain. I now make it a practice to call > my client to confirm that the file was received and that they could open and > use it. Janet, Excellent point! Here's a slightly amusing wrinkle on indexes getting lost in cyberspace. During the night, I had to email a large index to a client. I couldn't compress the file because the client didn't have WinZip or PKZIP/UNZIP to decompress it on his end and email attachments over 64K often get trashed going over the Net. (He didn't have WinCode or UUENCODE/DECODE either, so I had to send the files from my Netcom account where I knew that the MIME encapsulation would take care of the fact that the file was a binary file. AOL, OTOH, has given me problems in that regard.) So, I took the file and created five smaller files from it, each file containing sections of the index, like from letters A through E, F through H, etc. In the message that I attached the first file to, I told him that he could copy and paste each of the fragments into a new file, thus reconstituting the index. (Don't have WINZIP or WINCODE? No problem. Just add water. ;-D) Well, he called me just a little while ago and said that everything came through just fine except for the "E"s, so could I please send him just the E's. (Somehow, I had managed to title a file as A through E, but forgot to actually include them, which is easy to do at o'dark o'clock.) So, I had to send the "E"s to him in a separate Email. ;-D BTW, I also sent carbon copies of those messages and files to myself on my AOL account to verify that everything went through OK. However, today is a bad AOL day and it is repeatedly refusing to download the attached files, terminating the connection each time, even trashing unrelated mail. (Otherwise I could have caught the missing 'E' thing myself.) So, there are indeed many variables in this that need to work right for electronic file transfer to be a success. FTP doesn't always work right either, as I discovered week before last (though I have used it with success in the past). So, even if your client has an FTP site and you use that method to send the file, it's a good idea to call to check to ensure successful delivery. So far, however, clients have always called *me* in a panic when the file arrives as gibberish or truncated at the other end, but you can't count on that. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:26:37 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Carolyn G. Weaver" Subject: Re: Automated indexing and agents compared In-Reply-To: <199610281853.LAA07092@mx4.u.washington.edu> Actually, it's quite easy to make Win95 display the extensions. Just go into the View menu on the task bar and select Details (as opposed to Large Icon, Small Icon, or List. Then all your file names appear with the extension. I discovered this early-on, since I often give the same file name (except for extension) to Word and Excel documents. 'Details' is now my default for all Windows directories. Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, WA. phone: 206/930-4348 email: cweaver@u.washington.edu On Mon, 28 Oct 1996, Jonathan Sachs wrote: It's possible to make the Explorer display > extensions, but you have to be a novice-level Windows 95 guru to do it. ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:12:38 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Mail failure messages In a message dated 96-10-26 13:32:33 EDT, you write: > Jane,t I too have been getting "mail failure" messages and thinking a post > hasn't made it to the list. Are you using the non-Bitnet address for these > so-called "failed posts"? I am, and it seems that the address causes the > mail system to think there has been a failure...because there is no main > addressee and only a "cc" address. However, the "cc" address posts HAVE been > getting through. > > Anybody else experiencing this problem? > > =Sonsie= Sonsie and Janet, Those mail failures are due to the fact that there is a subscriber on the list with a bad address and you'll get one every time you post something until the address is either corrected or removed from the listserve. If you look at those messages, you'll see that the same email address is at fault each time. But your messages themselves are appearing on the list (However, it seems to be slower these days. Instead of appearing within a few minutes they seem to be taking hours to show up, but that may be AOL which seems to be a bit cranky recently.) The BITNET address, BTW, still seems to be working at this end, but some folks are having problems with it because not all ISPs can access Bitnet. But, being that Charlotte said that they'll be discontinuing that address, I'm using the other address when I remember to. Now, having posted this, I've just generated another "mail failure" message to come screaming down the pipe into my own inbox. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:52:09 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: Printers, purchasing of Hazel, I work on a Mac, so what I have to say about printers won't necessarily be relevant to you (but might be to others). When I first joined this list, everyone encouraged me to buy the best printer I could afford. That is, a laser printer if possible. I bought an Apple LaserWriter Select 300, which produces beautifully sharp indexes, letters, and resumes. I also tried it for business cards but found that the ink tends to rub or flake off when the card is handled a bit, so I got my business cards printed at Kinkos after that. The laser printer is also very fast. I guess that sharpness and speed explains why people are willing to pay more for them. Anyway, after a while, I felt like the toner cartridges were going to put me in the poorhouse. A cartridge for one of these babies, costs about $90. Finally, it hit me! We could get a second printer (an inkjet) for family and business use and actually save $$$, because I could use the inkject for all drafts of indexes and correspondence. I found an Apple Color StyleWriter 2400 for around $200. It uses Canon ink cartridges, and the black cartridges can be had from Office Depot for $7. I wish I could tell you how long it lasts, but I can't. If you go for an inkjet, look for one for which ink-tank refill kits are available. That should bring the price down quite a bit. Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | Life is good. Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | Milwaukee, WI | ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 15:00:00 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Justine Carson Subject: Re: Printers, purchasing of In-Reply-To: <199610282249.OAA28860@mail6> ** ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 18:23:03 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: FROM the SLA job listserv JOB ANNOUNCEMENT: SENIOR INDEXER Job Description: Develops and prepares indexes enabling readers to locate = specific information in National Geographic Society publications (magazines= books, television, online, other media). Reviews and corrects indexes of = peers. Does project management on a rotating basis or as needed to create o= r = maintain indexes. Qualifications: Becoming an indexer involves an apprenticeship to learn the= style of the National Geographic Society. It is very helpful to have a broa= liberal education and strong writing/proofreading/communication skills. = Person should be detail oriented and good at synthesis. Skill in WORD, = Cindex, and databases preferred. An MLS is preferred because the Indexing = division is responsible for developing electronic as well as print index = products. Location: 17th and M Street NW, Washington, DC. Salary and Benefits: starts at $25,000; $27,000 for qualified MLS. Includes= excellent benefits (medical, dental, life insurance, credit union, = retirement plan, tax deferred annuity/thrift savings plan). Closing Date: November 15, 1996 Please send a cover letter describing your interest and qualifications for = this job as well as a resume to Susan Fifer Canby, National Geographic = Society, 1145 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036. *************************************************************** PLEASE _DO NOT_ SEND EMAIL REPLIES TO jdombrow@ngs.org! Thank you. *************************************************************** ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 20:28:04 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Mail failure messages In a message dated 96-10-28 16:45:56 EST, you write: > But, being that Charlotte said that they'll be > discontinuing that address, I'm using the other address when I remember to. > What is the other address? Jan ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 18:03:03 +0000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Sachs Subject: Re: Automated indexing and agents compared At 11:26 AM 10/28/96 -0800, you wrote: >Actually, it's quite easy to make Win95 display the extensions. Just go >into the View menu on the task bar and select Details... Certainly it's easy to do; but try asking a novice user to figure it out! It took me a while the first time, and I've been using computers for 25 years. There are other obscure options hidden in there that I _still_ haven't figured out. Jonathan Sachs Sand River Software, Inc. ================================================================= ======== Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:34:03 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Linda Solow Blotner Subject: Re: Printers Hazel: I have an HP laserjet and I want to mention that if you use Macrex you might want to call them first. I had some problems in getting it set up correctly, in part because HP hadn't sent Macrex enough/the correct info. for them to work with. Macrex finally helped me sort things out so the printer and Macrex could communicate. But that's why I suggest that you might want to check with Macrex if you use that software. Linda At 02:14 PM 10/28/96, you wrote: >Return-Path: >Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM by uhavax.hartford.edu (MX V4.1 VAX) with SMTP; > Mon, 28 Oct 1996 14:14:36 EDT >Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (206.241.12.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP > for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <2.45FBD4B2@VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM>; Mon, > 28 Oct 1996 14:03:35 -0500 >Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 08:46:30 -0500 >Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group >Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group >From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee >Subject: Printers >X-To: Index-L >To: Multiple recipients of list INDEX-L > >Thank you so much to everybody who wrote to me privately and to Index-L >about printers. Your words of wisdom have been incredibly helpful. I'm >leaning toward a HP laser printer now, rather than an inkjet. Once the >budget's in shape (may be a while; we seem to've spent the year having >kittens neutered and spayed ;-} ), a new printer will materialize in my >very office. > >You people are terrific! > >Hazel > >Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) > sign that your cat has learned your Internet password: hate-mail > messages to Apple Computer Corp. about its release of "CyberDog" > > *************************** Linda Solow Blotner Hartt Library University of Hartford West Hartford, CT 06117 860-768-4492 blotner@uhavax.hartford.edu ****************************