From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 25-NOV-1997 20:44:38.59 To: CIRJA02 CC: Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9709E" Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 11:31:35 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9709E" To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 08:16:28 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Mark Dempsey Subject: Indexes for texts for teenagers -Reply The suggestions provided by Chris Blackburn for indexes targeted at teens seem like ones that would be useful for any index. >>> Chris Blackburn 09/28/97 11:20am >>> Rica, = Here are some comments for the list on your question about a text= for Grade 9 and 10 students: The report at the Dublin conference was chiefly concerned with children aged 7 to 11, but many recommendations would apply to older kids= , including keeping the abilities of the young person in mind. Of course yo= u need more space for the index, so it won't be squeezed into three pages o= f tiny type. Paragraph indexes are confusing: you need main entries with so= me indented subentries (preferring main entries to a lot of subentries). The general rule of indexing that a reference should take the reader to a page that gives him useful information about the subject or name indexed applies particularly to indexes for children and teenagers. Don't waste their time with passing references. Avoid too many page references after an entry. Prefer multiple entries to cross-references, as long as the multiple entries are not confusing (of course, include all references aft= er each of the entries). When a young person looks something up he expects t= o find right away a reference to a page that will give him info., not to be= redirected somewhere else around the index. At Dublin it was mentioned that kids like a header before each alphabetical block -- perhaps this is less important for teenagers, but m= ay make the index easier to use. A large part of the index may be keywords, often indicated in bol= d in the text and listed at the end of each chapter. This makes your job easier. You could also use bf for the most important references. Hope to see you again soon, Rica. Chris Blackburn ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 10:43:32 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: Hyperindex Versus Cindex In-Reply-To: <199709270420.XAA21407@mixcom.mixcom.com> > Not too long ago I received the sample software and user guide for >Cindex for Macintosh and it all looks very impressive but I've been using >Hyperindex for sometime and I wonder at the value of switching from one >system to another. What would be the rationale for doing so? I like HyperIndex very much, but my rationale for switching to Cindex was that I needed a lot more speed so I could do a lot more indexing in the course of a year. For example, steps that used to take a half hour in HyperIndex take only a few seconds in Cindex. Similarly, opening and closing various windows in HyperIndex (for navigating around and editing) takes longer than in Cindex--I need my indexing software to respond as fast as I can type. I do miss HyperIndex's "flip" button, though. OTOH, HyperIndex can do certain things that Cindex can't; those were features I never had occasion to use, but if I ever do, I still have HyperIndex on my system. > My primary publisher does not want the proof sheets marked up in any >way, manner or form unless I see errata and then only for that errata. The >proof sheets go back to him with the index. So I use the software as a sort >of virtual yellow or red pensil. In other words, instead of marking items of >possible interest, I copy everything of possible interest into the software. >Do some analysis and then Hyperindex does its magic with alphabetizing etc. >and passes everything into microsoft word where I actually work on turning >all these half digested notes into a real index. > You can do the same thing in Cindex. But why won't your publisher send you a page proof set you can mark up? If I had a client who insisted I send back clean pages, I would insist that they send me an indexing set. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 10:14:50 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: Resumes/CVs In-Reply-To: <199709260401.XAA05460@mixcom.mixcom.com> My full resume is 7 pages long and organized by skills rather than lists of jobs. My list of books I've indexed starts on a new page, so I can (1) add to it easily without changing all other page breaks and (2) mail it separately when a complete resume isn't needed. Although I occasionally send the full resume, more and more often I send my brochure and the list of books I've indexed (and a cover letter). That list, BTW, includes everything I've indexed, rather than just a select list, because that was the only way I could be sure to show all the different subjects *and* show that I've had a lot of repeat work from publishers. Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | I'm not into working out. My Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | philosophy: No pain, no pain. Milwaukee, WI | -- Carol Leifer http://www.mixweb.com/Roberts.Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 11:55:39 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Elsa F. Kramer" Subject: Re: Indexing Want To Be >Steven, > >You're definitely taking the right steps by reading those books and >practicing. The USDA coorespondence course on Basic Indexing is not >mandatory, but I have taken it and I *highly* recommend it. At $286 for an >11-lesson course that you have 1 year to complete (all course material is >included), it's a great deal, and an excellent way to get feedback from >experienced indexers. > Anyone have an opinion about how long it should really take to complete the course, or is one year the norm? Elsa Kramer Indianapolis ............................................................................ ..... Whatever games are played with us, we must play no games with ourselves, but deal in our privacy with the last honesty and truth. --Ralph Waldo Emerson ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 12:28:01 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Jan C. Wright" Subject: online help Hi Susan, First off, the character length limit for an individual K footnote is 1024, not 255. So you are lot less limited than you think. It sounds like RoboHelp is limiting you. I always ignore RoboHelp completely, and enter my keywords directly into the K footnotes. I have never had any trouble compiling a K footnote string of up to 1024 characters, even with RoboHelp doing the compiling. Secondly, in response to: >What you have to enter is: >frequency plots ,;frequency plots , creating;plots, frequency ,;plots, >frequency , creating;spectral plots ,;spectral plots , creating; What I would suggest is that you do not use commas to divide your main heads from your subheads - I have seen WinHelp blow up on those a lot. Go for : instead. Also, plan your stubhead entries, and don't use them with every subentry. Stub heads are the main heads that precede a list of subheads."spectral plots" for example, below, is a stubhead. spectral plots having holding plotting You have to have at least one stub head to get your subheads to look right. BUT you do not have to have a stubhead entry in each and every topic that has a spectral plots subentry. Once you have established one stubhead, you do not have to have more. I usually put the stub heads in overview topics or the most sensible topic. You use up a lot less of your room if you don't repeat that stubhead all the time. I know Microsoft suggests to repeat it for every topic, but I find that creates a useless overly-long list of topics if the user clicks on the stubhead. I would rather have them using the subentries I have written, not wading through 25 topic titles. So that is another way to winnow down your keywords to fit. I would also suggest that you capitalize your main entries, and lowercase your subentries. It is so much easier to debug what has gone wrong in your help file index if you do, as you can instantly tell which type of entry has gone haywire. Jan C. Wright -- Wright Information Indexing Services -- -- jancw@aol.com -- http://users.aol.com/jancw/wrightinfo.htm -- "One has two duties: to be worried and not to be worried." -- E. M. Forster ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 08:26:03 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: John and Kara Pekar Subject: oops Mea culpa, mea culpa! I'm very sorry -- in my exhausted state at around 1:00 this morning, I sent a *looooong* message to the list which I meant to send privately (due to length). Please accept my apologies; I didn't mean to clog up your email boxes with such a lengthy epistle. Very embarrassedly, Kara Pekar ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 16:08:58 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Chris Blackburn Subject: Good wishes for Lynn Moncrief I was very sorry to hear of Lynn Moncrief's illness, and hope she= will recover to full health. = I have learned a lot during the time I have been reading, or lurking on, Index-L, and have always found Lynn Moncrief's contributions useful. Some topics come up more than once on the list, and perhaps someo= ne who has kept track of some of Lyn's contributions would be able to say "S= ee Lynn Moncrief's comments on this topic, July 17, 1997," for example. That= might encourage some of us to learn how to use the archives. Or perhaps someone might re-post what she had to say on a topic. That way her sound advice could be seen until she feels like posting again. = If it is not inappropriate, I would like to offer two limericks: A listless indexer expounded On the reason Index-L was founded. "It's so lurkers like me May read A to Z Till our skills are considered well-grounded." or "Now my indexing sisters and brothers (in sin) Index-L is for reading: there's never a need to put in." Yes, that's what he said Though his eyes were quite red From absorbing the knowledge of others (like Lynn). Chris Blackburn ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 17:53:06 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ottesen Subject: Re: Online Help -- [ From: Ottesen * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] -- Jan: You wrote: > First off, the character length limit for an individual K footnote is 1024, not 255. So you are lot less limited than you think. It sounds like RoboHelp is limiting you. I always ignore RoboHelp completely, and enter my keywords directly into the K footnotes. I have never had any trouble compiling a K footnote string of up to 1024 characters, even with RoboHelp doing the compiling. > I tried it, and it works just fine. It truncates in the Robohelp indexing window, but who cares. Thanks! > You use up a lot less of your room if you don't repeat that stubhead all the time. > I guess it wasn't clear from my message, but that is exactly what I want to avoid. Thanks again, Susan Schionning Ottesen@ccis.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 10:25:52 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@AOL.COM Subject: sole proprietorship vs incorporation Good morning, everyone: Here's a question, which I realize we have discussed before, but it has fresh meaning for me now: As a full-time freelance indexer, which business status is better, sole propietorship or incorporation? [I am a U.S. citizen, btw, so this does not apply to any non-U.S. folk, though I would certainly not mind any suggestions re citizenship and/or taxes in other countries -- once the kids are grown who knows where we'll live? -- but my main concern right now is my own situation as a tax-paying U.S. citizen] I just met with a tax preparer consultant, and the recommendation is that I incorporate myself. --The savings would amount to several thousand dollars a year (even after fees for the tax preparation), due to taxes/deductions being taken from a W-2 vs self-employed. Being incorporated means I would put myself on an annual salary so taxes and deductions would be from the employee W-2 form. I would be able to withdraw additional funds from my business above and beyond the 'salary' throughout the year as I do now, as well. 'day-to-day' operations would not change. --additional benefits would include limited liability (should I ever need it), as well as the potential to disburse funds to my children, at no additional cost or tax expense (college expenses are on the horizon). Has anyone else dealt with this decision recently? I'm getting the feeling that I can't lose. The initial costs ($500 for the incorporation application) and the yearly fee for the tax preparation sound like money well spent as the tax savings are still large. [whether can I afford the upfront fees in the short term is another quesiton!] Are there some other advantages/disadvantages to incorporation I should know about? thanks in advance for any thoughts, happy indexing, ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------ L. Pilar Wyman * Wyman Indexing * PilarW@aol.com * http://members.aol.com/pilarw/web Committed to the readership that appreciates Great Books ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 12:26:57 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Elsa F. Kramer" Subject: Re: sole proprietorship vs incorporation >Are there some other advantages/disadvantages to incorporation I should know >about? > I recommend incorporation as a Subchapter S for all the reasons you have outlined. There are some differences in charitable giving, if that affects you, but if you are the only shareholder in your corporation it won't make any difference to you. Profit and loss pass directly to the shareholder(s) of an S corp, as do certain other expenses such as the cost of health insurance. The concept of limited liability is real but not, IMO, as big a deal as it is made out to be. If you go the bank to borrow money to buy a new computer, for example, you will be made to sign the note both as an individual and as an officer of your company. Therefore, your financial exposure as an individual remains the same. But if your company is not inventory-intensive or doesn't borrow, this is another thing which won't make any difference to you. There'll be a little more paperwork to do each month -- payroll tax deposits and reports, federal unemployment and state unemployment and so on -- but it's worth it. The advantages of incorporation are great, I think. Elsa Kramer Indianapolis ............................................................................ ..... Whatever games are played with us, we must play no games with ourselves, but deal in our privacy with the last honesty and truth. --Ralph Waldo Emerson ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 13:57:46 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Anne Taylor Subject: Re: sole proprietorship vs incorporation At 12:26 PM 9/30/97 -0500, you wrote: > >>Are there some other advantages/disadvantages to incorporation I should know >>about? And Elsa Kramer responded: >I recommend incorporation as a Subchapter S for all the reasons you have >outlined. There are some differences in charitable giving, if that affects >you, but if you are the only shareholder in your corporation it won't make >any difference to you. Profit and loss pass directly to the shareholder(s) >of an S corp, as do certain other expenses such as the cost of health >insurance. [...] Dumb question warning: Does your state of residence play a part in this? I thought the advantages of incorporation varied from state to state and that was why so many companies were headquartered in one state, but incorporated in another (Delaware being a favorite.) Or is this done by the big guys for state tax advantages that wouldn't apply to Subchapter S corporations? I'm hesitating to seek freelance work because I'm still working full-time for an institution and worry about being 'tax-slaughtered' because of the extra income. Are any of those who are Subch. S's also employed full-time by another company or institution? Anne sactayl@umslvma.umsl.edu [My mom suggests having a child to ease my tax burden, but I suspect she's playing the odds of adding a granddaughter to her brace of grandsons...] ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 15:49:46 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sharon Wright Subject: Re: sole proprietorship vs incorporation -Reply The lawyer in me is rearing its ugly head again. PLEASE consult a professional before you do anything like this! Anne is right-- the laws vary from state to state. I am not a corporate law specialist (far from it!), but I know that it's something that should be investigated carefully. A tax consultant, attorney who specializes in corporate law or financial advisor familiar with the laws of your state would be worth the price of a consulting fee! Over all, however, there are usually advantages to incorporating, and the S corporation entity is especially useful. It does involve some careful record-keeping, however, so make sure you understand everything that your state requires (records, filing requirements, etc.) and that you're willing to follow through. Just a warning from your friendly cyber-neighborhood paranoid! :-) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 13:36:42 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: sole proprietorship vs incorporation At 01:57 PM 9/30/97 -0500, Anne Taylor wrote: >Dumb question warning: Does your state of residence play a part in this? >I thought the advantages of incorporation varied from state to state and >that was why so many companies were headquartered in one state, but >incorporated in another (Delaware being a favorite.) Or is this done by >the big guys for state tax advantages that wouldn't apply to Subchapter S >corporations? The costs of incorporation in Delaware are considerably cheaper...that's why so many larger companies actually incorporate there. And that state seems to have fewer regulations governing corporations as well. >[My mom suggests having a child to ease my tax burden, but I suspect she's >playing the odds of adding a granddaughter to her brace of grandsons...] If you're looking for a great tax deduction that does not involve 2 a.m. feedings, buy a house or condo. The interest is 100% deductible (on Schedule A or C or both) in almost every case, and it amounts to probably 90% or more of your house payment for the first few years. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 15:46:21 -0500 Reply-To: davidaus@indiana.edu Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: david robert austen Subject: Re: sole proprietorship vs incorporation My advice: Always. always, always listen to your mother. My other advice: sometimes I wish Bill Gates had worried about getting "tax slaughtered" and just stayed home instead of going into THAT business. Promise not to be the next Microsoft - BUT please don't let tax-fear spoil _your_ dream. David ----- Anne Taylor wrote: > > At 12:26 PM 9/30/97 -0500, you wrote: > > > >>Are there some other advantages/disadvantages to incorporation I should know > >>about? > > And Elsa Kramer responded: > > >I recommend incorporation as a Subchapter S for all the reasons you have > >outlined. There are some differences in charitable giving, if that affects > >you, but if you are the only shareholder in your corporation it won't make > >any difference to you. Profit and loss pass directly to the shareholder(s) > >of an S corp, as do certain other expenses such as the cost of health > >insurance. > > [...] > > Dumb question warning: Does your state of residence play a part in this? > I thought the advantages of incorporation varied from state to state and > that was why so many companies were headquartered in one state, but > incorporated in another (Delaware being a favorite.) Or is this done by > the big guys for state tax advantages that wouldn't apply to Subchapter S > corporations? > > I'm hesitating to seek freelance work because I'm still working full-time > for an institution and worry about being 'tax-slaughtered' because of the > extra income. Are any of those who are Subch. S's also employed full-time > by another company or institution? > > Anne > sactayl@umslvma.umsl.edu > > [My mom suggests having a child to ease my tax burden, but I suspect she's > playing the odds of adding a granddaughter to her brace of grandsons...] ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 13:47:00 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Taxes, Etc. In light of the ongoing discussion about incorporation, taxes, etc., I'd like to recommend a book I've found extremely useful. It's also got an extensive discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of incorporation (both C and S). It's written by a CPA and a researcher, and full of real documentation for the positions it takes. Despite the somewhat sensational title, it's not about how to cheat on your taxes so much as it is about how to work with the IRS rules to your best advantage...bolstered by the authors' years of experience with audits and other atrocities. You'll also learn a great deal about the inner workings of the IRS and common misperceptions about it. Martin Kaplan, CPA, and Naomi Weiss, _What the IRS Doesn't Want You to Know: A CPA Reveals the Tricks of the Trade, 3rd ed., Villard Books (div. of Random House), New York, 1996. ISBN: 0-679-77371-1 =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 17:20:48 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Peg Mauer Subject: Re: sole proprietorship vs incorporation In a message dated 97-09-30 12:58:01 EDT, you write: > As a full-time freelance indexer, which business status is better, sole > propietorship or incorporation? Pilar, Funny you should ask! I just recently asked this question of a friend of mine who is incorporated. Here's her reply to me: Well, you have to decide if the advantages are advantageous enough for you! The advantages are that all the business assets are owned by the corporation rather than by you personally. So, if you get sued and lose, you only lose the business assets but not your personal assets. If you are not incorporated, you could lose all of your personal assets: house, retirement funds, everything. Business insurance helps protect you but not as completely as incorporating. The disadvantage is that you have to pay corporate tax (15%) on your profits. But you can minimize your profits so this, for me at least, is fairly low. You no longer need to prepare a Schedule C or whatever it is for having your own business. Personal taxes are definitely easier to file. Here's the way mine works: The corporation bills and receives payment. I am an employee of the corporation and receive a W-2 like anyone else (taxes are withheld, the corp pays health insurance, retirement, etc.). At the end of the corporate year (mine ends 5/31, you can make your dates anything you want -- I would advise against making it the calendar year end), you prepare a corporate tax return (I have an accountant do it and it costs me around $250) and pay corporate tax on your profit. The trick is to minimize profit but still show one so you pay as little tax as possible. What I do is pay myself a bonus if I have too much money in the business and I also hold up deposits after payroll is run so I can control how much is in the account (basically my profits and what is in my checking account are the same). It sounds a bit complicated but it's not. Companies like Paychex help out by providing insurances and making tax payments if you like. Of course, that is available even if you are not incorporated. One more thing: Lawyers will charge you a lot of money for incorporating but essentially what they do is pay for a name search (to make sure no one has a business with the same name as yours) and then a corporation paper filing fee. When I incorporated about 7 years ago, this came to about $250. Most lawyers will charge you $1000-5000 to perform this service for you. It's a rip-off. Find out what the fees are now so you can figure out what would be a reasonable rate to pay. BTW, I am incorporated in NY State. You can incorporate in another state if you like, Maryland is popular, but frankly I find that a pain in the butt because it is easy to find an accountant who is familiar with NYS laws but tougher to find one who knows the laws in another state. Your corporate taxes might be less but you may spend that in figuring it out. So there's my long diatribe on incorporation. It's really a personal choice. I did it partly because it looks better to Kodak and Xerox and partly because my personal assets far outnumber my business assets and I didn't want to risk losing everything I worked for. And I have a terrific bookkeeper who takes care of all the messy details for me. Your mileage may vary. Peg again: If you have specific questions, I could put you in touch with her. This ought to be interesting; I haven't decided for myself yet either, so I'll be interested in your replies to this one! Peg Mauer | http://members.aol.com/Pmauer/index.html Communication Link | phone: (518) 359-8616 Indexing, Technical Writing | fax: (518) 359-8235 PO Box 192 | co-leader of Western NY ASI chapter Piercefield, NY 12973 | Manager of STC Indexing SIG ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 17:21:47 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DP1301@AOL.COM Subject: Re: sole proprietorship vs incorporation Great question! My tax expert says it depends on level of revenue and whether that's worth all the complexity incorporating generates. There's a lot of paperwork when you incorporate and it's regular paperwork. That balances with the time we'd save getting our indexing done, and not having to file that tax form. You and I are at different stages in running our businesses so we present a different character of what we're doing to the tax expert. For me, right now, the paperwork complexity factor just isn't worth it. I only really have to cope with keeping up with insurance, paying into SEPs and IRAs and doing my taxes. Deborah ==================== Deborah Patton, Indexer Baltimore, MD dp1301@aol.com 410/243-4688 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 14:19:11 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lindsay Gower Subject: "See Also" Hyperlinks Dear Fellow Indexers: I'm puzzling out how to provide "see also" links in Web documents. We have our reference manuals on-line now and are trying to plan ahead (what a concept!) to put user manuals up as well. If any of you have done this, particularly in FrameMaker, I'd appreciate hearing if you used "see also" and how you managed it. TIA! -- LG ----------------------------------------------------------------- Lindsay Gower | email: lindsay@persistence.com Technical Writer | phone: 1.650.372.3606 Persistence Software Inc. | fax: 1.650.341.8432 1720 S. Amphlett Blvd., Suite 300 | http://www.persistence.com San Mateo, CA USA 94402 | ---------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 16:45:30 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Anne Taylor Subject: Re: sole proprietorship vs incorporation >At 01:36 PM 9/30/97 -0700, Sonsie wrote: >>At 01:57 PM 9/30/97 -0500, Anne Taylor wrote: [...] >>[My mom suggests having a child to ease my tax burden, but I suspect she's >>playing the odds of adding a granddaughter to her brace of grandsons...] > >If you're looking for a great tax deduction that does not involve 2 a.m. >feedings, buy a house or condo. The interest is 100% deductible (on Schedule >A or C or both) in almost every case, and it amounts to probably 90% or more >of your house payment for the first few years. > > =Sonsie= LOL! I did buy a house and I'll take issue with your assertion that they don't need attention at 2 a.m. (The boiler developed a loud burping rhythm and the pipes set up a righteous clang one winter's night. Scared the flannel off of me. Pulled on me robe and real shoes and trudged to the netherworld basement to stare at it dumbfounded. No hope of rocking the thing back to sleep.) The house did help greatly, but I think I'm experiencing something they used to call 'bracket creep'; the latest salary increase went mostly to the feds and state. I think I'm at that stage in life where I need to sit down with a professional and figure out the best strategies overall and how much I'd need to make as a freelancer to actually increase my standard of living, rather than just my tax liability. Thanks, Anne Anne Cleester Taylor University of Missouri-St. Louis Thomas Jefferson Library Reference sactayl@umslvma.umsl.edu http://www.umsl.edu/~ataylor ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 17:13:01 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Elsa F. Kramer" Subject: Re: sole proprietorship vs incorporation In-Reply-To: <199709302139.QAA19964@beavis.inetdirect.net> >Well, you have to decide if the advantages are advantageous enough for you! >The advantages are that all the business assets are owned by the >corporation rather than by you personally. So, if you get sued and lose, >you only lose the business assets but not your personal assets. Just want to reiterate what I said earlier: You CAN lose personal assets if you have used them as collateral to take on debt for your business, even if you're incorporated. > >The disadvantage is that you have to pay corporate tax (15%) on your >profits. S corporations DO NOT pay corporate taxes. Profit is passed through to the shareholder(s) and taxed at individual rates, which can be higher than 15% depending on your income. >One more thing: Lawyers will charge you a lot of money for incorporating >but essentially what they do is pay for a name search (to make sure no one >has a business with the same name as yours) and then a corporation paper >filing fee. I did not have to do this search. It's been a long time, but I believe the state of Indiana did this as part of the filing fee, which was a nominal amount. I did, at a later date, pay big bucks to the Patents and Trademark office in Washington to have my company name and logo trademarked. I understand that you can do some of this searching online now, but haven't tried it. Elsa Kramer Indianapolis ............................................................................... . . Whatever games are played with us, we must play no games with ourselves, but deal in our privacy with the last honesty and truth. --Ralph Waldo Emerson ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 18:16:26 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Seth A. Maislin" Subject: Re: "See Also" Hyperlinks In-Reply-To: Lindsay Gower ""See Also" Hyperlinks" (Sep 30, 2:19pm) > I'm puzzling out how to provide "see also" links in Web documents. Lindsay, There is no easy way to do this. In fact, there is no way to do this at all, unless you are willing to resort to special scripts or manual work. This is because the people who are writing Web languages are completely unaware that indexes are important. I mean, who would really want to find anything online anyway, right? We have search engines! (groan) One possibility is to link the cross references directly to the locations in the index where you want them. In FrameMaker, that means embedding your index with the links themselves. But this is like circular reasoning: you need an index to create an index. So this simply doesn't work. Ultimately, in HTML, you need named anchors at the locations your see-also xrefs are supposed to point, and then you have to insert the xref text where it belongs (alphabetically, for example). This is a manual process, and it can be painful. There are two ways to automate this, however, and this might help give you ideas on how to start this in FrameMaker. Both of these require scripts. 1. When you index is finished, run a script that inserts a unique named anchor above every term in your index. (Of course, the word "every" is a nasty word, under these circumstances.) Then, when you add or edit your see also xrefs, you can link to these unique terms. For example (the numbers in asterisks are hyperlinks): Portion of BookIndex.htm file ... software, *1*, *2*, *3* plug-ins, *4*, *5* spam, avoiding, _link4_ ... Cross references (elsewhere in index) junk email. See also plug-ins. See also This is an ugly option, but it will work. Your script would convert your FrameMaker output into these links automatically. Or else you could create the named anchors and the see-also hyperlinks as two post-processing steps, using scripts that will work on the simple ASCII of the HTML. 2. This option is easier, but not as friendly. Simply point your cross references to the letter head. For example: junk email. See also plug-ins. See also software, *1*, *2*, *3* plug-ins, *4*, *5* spam, avoiding, _link4_ This is not as good as it good be, obvious, but I've known a publisher to this because it's an easier output to generate. It's a big sacrifice, though. (But aren't you running into the same issues with See links?) 3. The compromise is to come up with some way of labeling the FrameMaker tags in advance. Perhaps you can invent some tag that you can type right into the New Marker window that identifies a certain marker as being a target for a see-also reference. For example: <$SeeAlsoTarget>software:plug-ins Then you can convert this in your script. These are just some ideas. I think the only "real" solution is to fix these things up manually at the very end. If you do make the changes manually, you might want to collect all your see-also cross references into one file, and then insert them all at once. - Seth -- Seth A. Maislin (seth@oreilly.com) <-- NOTE THE NEW DOMAIN O'Reilly & Associates Focus Publishing Services 90 Sherman Street 89 Grove Street Cambridge MA 02140 Watertown MA 02172-2826 (617) 499-7439 phone (617) 924-4428 (617) 661-1116 facsimile smaislin@world.std.com URL: http://www.oreilly.com/people/staff/seth <-- NEW DOMAIN Webmaster, Amer Soc of Indexers: http://www.well.com/user/asi