From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 2-MAR-1996 09:18:56.63
To: CIRJA02
CC:
Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9602E"
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 1996 08:37:13 +0000
From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a)
<LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu>
Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9602E"
To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:37:04 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: WordenDex@aol.com
Subject: Re: Tables and figures
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Craig,
How about extracting just the key topic noun/s (two or three) of the
caption/title?
Diane
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:37:12 ECT
Reply-To: becohen@prairienet.org
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: "Barbara E. Cohen" <becohen@prairienet.org>
Subject: Re: Marking pages
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
This thread reminds me of something I tell the indexers I have been
training: it doesn't matter how you get there, it matters what the
final index looks like. I can keep a running list of a few hundred
entries in my brain after I've typed them, so I keep double-posting
and revising as I go (I underline in pencil just before entering a
concept, name, term, or something that is my "note" to myself of
what I am typing as an entry). I have worked with other people
who cannot keep all that in their heads, or don't want to, so they
write out more. I find that if I have underlined something, I can
return to my work quickly after the phone interrupts me--I suspect
Lynn doesn't answer the phone while she's working. Or, I should say that if I
worked the way Lynn does, I could not answer the phone while I was
working.
Anyway, what it boils down to is that each indexer has a different
way of structuring the work process to arrive at a coherent index,
and the final product matters more than the specific route to
get there.
I do enjoy knowing how other people work, but I doubt I could
ever give up marking pages, if only as a break physically from
constantly typing. I am NOT one of those who can type well enough
to enter entries before I mull them over, I guess.
Anyway, I would love to see a KW issue that contained nothing but
sample pages of marked text (Lynn's of course would have no marks!)
so we could compare what we would do with the same text. Maybe
this is a topic for upcoming chapter meetings??
Barbara
--
Barbara E. Cohen
Indexing & Editorial Services
Champaign, IL
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:37:24 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Isawriter@aol.com
Subject: Re: Letter-by-letter alphabetizing on Mac?
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Hi, Karin....
>>Is there a program or utility for the Mac that does letter-by-letter
alphabetizing?<<
I don't know of a freestanding sort for the Macintosh. If you are working in
an imbedded index environment (i.e., creating your index entries from within
the manuscript itself), one alternative would be to use HyperIndex which
allows you to import text or RTF documents and create the index entries
on-screen. HyperIndex will accommodate letter by letter sorts.
Craig Brown
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:37:33 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: JanCW@aol.com
Subject: Fwd: SIG VIS News
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
For those interested in visual or image indexing, this looks kinda useful.
---------------------
Forwarded message:
From: GOODRUM@lis.unt.edu (Abby Goodrum)
Sender: ASIS-L@asis.org (ASIS-L: American Society for Information Science)
Reply-to: goodrum@lis.unt.edu
To: ASIS-L@asis.lib.indiana.edu (Multiple recipients of list ASIS-L)
Date: 96-02-28 17:05:11 EST
Volume 2 of the SIG VIS Newsletter is now available on at
http://www.unt.edu/~aag0001/index.html
In this issue of THE SIG VIS NEWS:
"Pictures, Aboutness, and User-Generated Descriptors"
by Brian C. O'Connor
http://www.unt.edu/~aag0001/oconnor.html
"Issues in Shot-Level Indexing of Moving Images: What Constitutes
a Shot?"
by James M. Turner
http://www.unt.edu/~aag0001/turner.html
____________________________
Abby A. Goodrum "Somebody has to do something,
University of North Texas and it's just incredibly
goodrum@lis.unt.edu pathetic that it has to be us"
(817) 565-2445 - Jerry Garcia -
____________________________
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:37:41 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: JanCW@aol.com
Subject: Re: file Transfer
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
In a message dated 96-02-28 17:28:32 EST, you write:
> I sent an ASCII text file of an index
>that was in paragraph format. The publisher doesn't use codes for the
>different levels of entries, so I started with a text file with paragraphs
>that had soft returns within the para.
Did you paste it into a message, or did you attach the file? I have sent
dozens of files attached to mail through CompuServe to other members, with no
problems. But I always attach the file, not paste it in. I do this on AOL as
well and have no problems. The one time I have any problems is when someone
sends it MIME encapsulated, which only sporadically seems to work.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:37:51 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: "Elizabeth M. Moys" <betty@moys.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Marking pages
In-Reply-To: <825521148.17968.0@vms.dc.lsoft.com>
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
In message <825521148.17968.0@vms.dc.lsoft.com>, JPerlman@aol.com writes
>
>A further thought on marking pages.
>
>Marilyn touched briefly on an excellent point. Perhaps it has to do with the
>type of material being indexed, rather than how long one has been indexing.
> The "upper-level" scientific material I index is highly complex, involved,
>and conceptual. It would be difficult to impossible to keyboard and index at
>the same time, as formulating an entry often means reading and understanding
>a few pages of very difficult text and figuring out its relation to the
>preceding text and the material following, etc. My pages rarely have more
>than one or two headings and/or italicized/boldface headings and terms. Not
>much jumps out at you.
>
I find almost exactly the same applies to the professional legal manuals
which I index. It would be quite impossible to index with either sense
or sensibility unless I read the text very carefully, and highlighted
the concepts which needed to be included, If a concept is present, but
not in so many words, I write it in with my trusty Biro. I do not
imagine that I am in any way unusal in this, I just wanted to join in
the fun!
All the best,
Betty Moys
====================================================================
Elizabeth M. Moys email: betty@moys.demon.co.uk
Phone & Fax: (UK) 01959-534530
Hengist, Badgers Road, Badgers Mount,
Sevenoaks, Kent, TN14 7AT, England
====================================================================
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:41:36 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: PilarW@aol.com
Subject: Re: Marking Page Proofs
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Ann,
I think you're helping me turn around ... ;-D
As I may have mentioned in one of my earlier posts, I recently marked a book
for a subcontractor to keyboard.
While I found marking difficult at times, and felt distanced from the book
while doing the final editing, the whole process was much more profitable for
me than usual, and I thoroughly enjoyed being away from the computer for a
while. It was a different process for me, but I can see the merit of it. I
can also see how one would improve over time.
Interesting how our mind's work; the intellectual process continues, it
seems, no matter which method we use to get the information on a piece of
paper.
Thanks for all the insights (everybody!),
Pilar
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:41:45 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: John Howe <johnh@aiche.org>
Subject: Re: Letter-by-letter alphabetizing on Mac?
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
--part_AD5B2B8D0002134D00000001
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: Inline
> ----------------------------Original messag
> e---------------------------- Hi everyone,
>
> Is there a program or utility for the Mac that does
> letter-by-letter alphabetizing? Both of the word processors I
> use (Microsoft Word and MacWrite Pro) only do word-by-word sorting.
>
> I'm kind of new to indexing, but I do know that there's got to be a
> better way than sorting word by word on my word processor and then
> letter by letter myself. I haven't gotten to the point of using
> a dedicated indexing program yet, although I'm seriously thinking
> of checking out CINDEX one of these days.
>
> Thanks for any advice/recommendations.
>
> Karin Arrigoni
>
>
>
The Mac version of In>Sort alphabetizes letter-by-letter and word-by-word. It
retails for $79. Contact Kensa Software, P.O. Box 4415, Northbrook, IL 60065
Tel: (708) 559-0297.
--part_AD5B2B8D0002134D00000001
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: Inline
John Howe, CEP Managing Editor
345 E. 47th St.
New York, NY 10017
Voice: (212) 705-7334
Fax: (212) 705-7812
e-mail: johnh@aiche.org
--part_AD5B2B8D0002134D00000001--
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:41:55 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Indexing Services <INDEXSVC@INDYVAX.BITNET>
Subject: ASI Heartland Chapter Meeting
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
ASI Heartland Chapter Spring Meeting
Saturday, March 23, 1996, 1-5 pm
Wayne Library
198 S. Girls School Rd.
Indianapolis, IN
Alexandra Nickerson will discuss editing an index. This is a follow-
up to Lori Lathrop's presentation last fall. Alexandra will work with
a live index and present a step-by-step procedure for sucessful editing.
She will also include tips on using Cindex for more efficient editing.
Business meeting at 3:30. Non-ASI members welcome, $3.00 fee at door.
RSVP to Joan Griffitts, email: indexsvc@indyvax.iupui.edu, 317/297-7312.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:42:07 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Alison Chipman <AChipman@aat.getty.edu>
Subject: Citing the Web
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Dear Index-L subscribers,
Last August you gave me a lot of help on the question of citing
electronic documents. Today I post a similar though not identical
question. Has anyone come up with a good style for citing a Web site?
The Chicago Manual of Style 14 gives one example at 15.424 of a
citation to a document posted on an electronic bulletin board. This
is the Internet, but not exactly a Web site.
Of course the http.// address would have to be given in the citation.
And since Web sites can change so quickly, probably one should give
the date, and perhaps even the time of day? Some Web sites are so
unsubstantial that one probably wouldn't care to cite them at all, at
least not to support a scholarly argument. But many offer documents
directly analagous to articles, bibliographic catalogs, encyclopedia
articles, even books. And I can foresee cases where one would want to
give a reference to a Web page, as when giving examples of page
design, usage of language on the web, and so on.
I'm going to post the same query to Copyeditors-L. If I get a few
responses, I'll summarize the results and post them for the
edification and delight of all. Please respond to the email address
below, not to the list. Any and all advice is gratefully appreciated.
Sincerely,
Alison Chipman
achipman@aat.getty.edu
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:42:40 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: DStaub11@aol.com
Subject: Re: Marking Page Proofs
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Pilar wrote:
>
>>I find it a nightmare to cross post while I'm entering.
>
>Interesting! I love flipping and doubleposting while I'm entering--that way
I
>generally don't have to worry about it at the end.
Me too! Macrex makes it so easy to flip and doublepost that I do it
automatically--I check during the editing process at the end, but unless it's
a complicated structure that I re-did in the middle, I don't usually catch
any missed pages.
Janet wrote:
> The "upper-level" scientific material I index is highly complex, involved,
and conceptual. It would be difficult to impossible to keyboard and index at
the same time, as formulating an entry often means reading and understanding
a few pages of very difficult text and figuring out its relation to the
preceding text and the material following, etc<
This is so interesting! I index highly complex, involved, conceptual material
too. But it's not scientific, it's scholarly. I end up reading the same
paragraph over and over before keying in the entry--but it works for me. For
the very most difficult texts, the ones that I find truly difficult to
understand, I have lately been reading ahead and marking the basic concepts
very generally, without pressuring myself to come up with actual headings.
Then when I'm at the computer I find it falls into place more easily.
I guess it is a case of "to each her own"!
Janet writes: >You can't search and edit in Macrex as you can in Cindex,
which also plays a part in how one can work.<
I've got to take exception to this. Maybe I'm not understanding what you
mean, but in Macrex I search and edit all the time. During the whole process
I'm jumping all over the index changing things!
Do Mi (not meaning to get into a Macrex vs. Cindex argument!)
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:45:48 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Susan Sandford Pty Ltd <susans@vicnet.net.au>
Subject: Re: Marking Page Proofs
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Hi everybody,
Janet wrote:
>
>Seems simple, but yet nobody said it until now. Bright colored pens. I only
>work in red. Anything written on the page or underlined is in red if not in
>highlighter. I never use black or blue.
I have found that green is a good colour ink for marking as, like red, it
really stands out.
I highlight groups of words on a page as a concept which I might want to
include. I highlight a whole chapter and then key it in while framing all
of the index entries directly to the keyboard. The highlighting acts as a
"safety net" letting me quickly check on the concept I intended to index
when I reach the editing stage.
Susan Sandford.
ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Susan Sandford,
Susan Sandford Pty Ltd.,
Ph. (+61 3) 9482 2695
Fax (+61 3) 9482 6595
E-mail susans@vicnet.net.au
ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 16:45:59 ECT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: MONICA.PETERSEN@ey.com
Subject: Re: file Transfer
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Joanne Clendenen wrote:
"But, when I sent the index, all the soft line returns were changed to hard
paragraph
returns, so there was no way to tell which lines belonged to one paragraph.
We gave up at that point and went back to FEDEX. If anyone is computer
literate enough to know a way to get around this problem, let me know."
Try this, if you can: in your original file, separate paragraphs by 2
returns. When the soft returns are all changed to hard ones on the other
end, your paragraphs are still separated by two consecutive returns, so they
are easy to find. Then, the publisher can use some method (like a
Search/Replace function) to look for and remove single paragraph marks that
are followed by a character wildcard -- something that will act on spaces
and alphanumeric characters, but ignore paragraph codes. The result: all
the single paragraph returns disappear, and all the pairs of returns turn
into singles. Ta Da!
Much better if you can do it: follow the discussion about simply attaching
the file to an email message, using a typical binary protocol (I've never
used MIME knowingly). Someone else just mentioned doing this with email
sent through CompuServe, which I have also done, and through AOL.
In my CompuServe software, I can't put any text into such email. I specify
a target address, the subject, and the name and path of the file I want to
send. On the other end, when the recipient downloads and then reads the
mail, s/he sees a standard, automatic message that says this mail involves a
file attachment. If you're lazy like me, you let it download automatically
into a default directory under a default name (it tells what the file name
is). You can rename the file, and you're done. Or, you can download
manually, specifying the target directory and file name you want. Either
way, it's all there, formatting and everything.
Fun with technology, eh? When it works, that is!
Monica Petersen
monica.petersen@ey.com
"There IS more to life than having everything. I have seen what it's like
for the average man and now I no longer doubt."