From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 1-JUL-1996 12:42:27.35
To: CIRJA02
CC:
Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9606E"
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 12:42:41 +0000
From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a)
<LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu>
Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9606E"
To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 14:25:00 BST-1
Reply-To: russnh@cix.compulink.co.uk
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Russell Heath <russnh@CIX.COMPULINK.CO.UK>
Subject: Indexing prepositions
Cathy, my wife, is in the process of indexing a Chinese cookery book and
would like some advice on how to index long recipe titles containing
prepositions. She's looked at several other cookery books' indexes and
they all differ. The British Standard is not much help either!
She says:
Can anyone advise on the following:
1. Are there any articles written about indexing cookery books?
2. Are there any prime examples of well indexed cookery books?
3. Use of prepositions in long recipe titles - is it correct to list the
full title of the recipe as it appears in the text, under the main
ingredients (which would make the index longer)?
One example with two entries:
Text title:
chicken and pork with peanut sauce
should it be:
either: pork
and chicken with peanut sauce
or: pork
chicken and pork with peanut sauce
and
either: sauce
peanut, with chicken and pork
or: sauce
chicken and pork with peanut sauce
Also what about the use of "with" ?
e.g. mushrooms with-red cooked duck
Should this be:
mushrooms
with red-cooked duck
or:
mushrooms
red-cooked duck, with
Some advice from more experienced indexers would be appreciated, thanks.
Cathy
(on Russell's account)
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 12:06:07 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Infojo6363@AOL.COM
Subject: Literary Market Place
Is Literary Market Place the same as Writers Market Place or are these two
entirely different books?
I am familiar with the annual Writer's M P, as its commonly found in any
bookstore. If its not the same as Literary M P, could someone provide the
ISBN or pub details?
TIA
JP
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 12:17:50 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: GvRaven@AOL.COM
Subject: subscribe
subscribe GvRaven
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 09:33:09 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Elinor Lindheimer <elinorl@MCN.ORG>
Subject: Re: Indexing prepositions
Russell and Cathy,
You have just honed in on the hardest starting point in indexing
cookbooks: deciding on the style. There does NOT seem to be any standard.
The length allowed for the index is the most important constraint, followed
by the house style, if any, and then it's the indexer's choice.
>1. Are there any articles written about indexing cookery books? See KEY
WORDS Issue 98, pp. 1 and 4.
>2. Are there any prime examples of well indexed cookery books? THE JOY OF
COOKING is a classic. But what counts in looking at an index is: does it work?
>3. Use of prepositions in long recipe titles - is it correct to list the
>full title of the recipe as it appears in the text, under the main
>ingredients (which would make the index longer)?
This is often a matter of space constraints. I love to see the full recipe
title, IF there aren't a lot of subentries. If there are, it's often better
to see the main word first. Let's look at the examples:
>Text title:
>chicken and pork with peanut sauce
(I'd capitalize--but that's a style decision--often a house style)
>
>should it be:
>
>either: pork
> and chicken with peanut sauce
I wouldn't use this: the recipe title is "Chicken and Pork with Peanut Sauce"
>or: pork
> chicken and pork with peanut sauce
Yes, I like this.
either: sauce
> peanut, with chicken and pork
>or: sauce
> chicken and pork with peanut sauce
There's another alternative:
sauce (or sauces if you have many)
peanut, chicken and port with
And don't forget:
chicken
chicken and pork with peanut sauce
OR
chicken
and pork with peanut sauce
Again, I would choose depending on the major style decision you are going
with. The second version is perfectly acceptable, because it works.
>Also what about the use of "with" ?
>
>e.g. mushrooms with-red cooked duck
>
>Should this be:
>
> mushrooms
> with red-cooked duck
Yes, this works fine.
>or:
>
> mushrooms
> red-cooked duck, with
This sounds awkward me.
You could also use:
mushrooms
mushrooms with red-cooked duck
if there were many mushroom recipes--however, I like the first alternative.
Then there's
duck
red-cooked, mushrooms with
OR
duck
mushrooms with red-cooked duck
In this case, I also prefer the first alternative.
Have fun!
Elinor Lindheimer
elinorl@mcn.org
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:23:40 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: MrsIndex@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Indexing prepositions
Regarding this query:
>>Should this be:
mushrooms
with red-cooked duck
or:
mushrooms
red-cooked duck, with<<
Does one's choice of style depend on how prominent a part a certain
ingredient plays? If the recipe were titled "Red-cooked duck with
mushrooms", and turned out to be lots and lots of chicken with mushrooms as
a garnish, it seems as if there should be these postings:
Duck, red-cooked, with mushrooms, xx
Mushrooms, red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx
(or maybe Mushrooms, in red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx)
Red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx
But if the recipe were very mushroom intensive, it seems more appropriate to
have these postings:
Duck, red-cooked, with mushrooms, xx
Mushrooms, with red-cooked duck, xx
Red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx
What I'm really asking is this: Should one think first about recipe content,
and second about parallelism in stlye? Or is it better to have perfect
parallelism of style with less reference to recipe content? I tend toward
recipe content first, but I'm always unhappy when it means that things don't
match perfectly. But then I figure that the reader is probably more
concerned about the recipes and isn't very likely to be reading the index in
the way that I would. It's such a quandary. Any cookbook indexing advice is
appreciated.
Allison Brooks
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:02:40 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Sonsie Conroy <sconroy@SLONET.ORG>
Subject: Re: cold calling
In-Reply-To: <199606281932.MAA17972@spork.callamer.com>
Janet, one of the reasons I usually try and call somebody to whom I've sent
a resume package is that I used to work on the other side of the desk and
believe me, the amount of letters we would get that started off, "I just
LOVE to read and I know I could be a wonderful editor/proofreader/what-have-
you" was amazing.
Now, it's true that anybody with the credentials that most of us in this
group have would usually jump right out of the "slush pile" and into some
editor's file. However, those files are tucked away for the most part, and
only looked at in an emergency...when the editor's favorite indexer is
unable to take on a job. By then, the name association is cold, the resume
may be a year or two old, and it's buried under 20 similarly impressive
pieces of paper.
So I do try to follow up with at least one phone call after I've sent the
package. If the person is receptive and sounds even vaguely interested, I
generally will continue to check back at intervals...say, every six months
or so. You would be amazed at how many times I get a response along the
lines of, "Am I glad you called! I just had someone turn me down and I'm
desperate to find an indexer."
Another thing I do is send out a note to all current clients and hot
prospects whenever I do anything new in my business. When I got my fax
machine a few years ago, I designed a postcard and sent it out to about
100 of these people. I did the same thing when I got an e-mail address,
and so on. I don't usually get personal responses from these kinds of
mailings, but again, they serve to keep my name in front of editors who
can hire me. And then I call...and they remember me.
=Sonsie=
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:14:12 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Sonsie Conroy <sconroy@SLONET.ORG>
Subject: Re: Toner cartridges
In-Reply-To: <199606282232.PAA06352@spork.callamer.com>
Diane, I get about 3000 copies from my HP refills, which cost about $90. So
$180 for 6000 seems about proportional to me.
=Sonsie=
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:17:46 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Sonsie Conroy <sconroy@SLONET.ORG>
Subject: Re: Literary Market Place
In-Reply-To: <199606291609.JAA19684@spork.callamer.com>
You're talking about two different books:
_Writers' Market_, published annually by Writers' Digest Press,
which is especially good for =writers= looking for places to
submit their work. Also good as a secondary source for information
on publishers for freelancers like us.
_LMP (Literary Market Place)_, published by Bowker, which is "the"
listing of U.S. publishers, imprints, names and numbers, etc. Also
has listings of freelancers in various areas, suppliers, printers,
etc. This is the Bible for people looking for freelance work; this
is where you go to get up-to-date names (not just titles) for
editors to contact, types of books a company publishes, etc.
=Sonsie=
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 00:07:00 BST-1
Reply-To: russnh@cix.compulink.co.uk
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Russell Heath <russnh@CIX.COMPULINK.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Indexing prepositions
Thanks all for your help, I've now got a better idea!
Cathy
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 22:39:24 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Elinor Lindheimer <elinorl@MCN.ORG>
Subject: Re: Indexing prepositions
Allison wrote:
>Does one's choice of style depend on how prominent a part a certain
>ingredient plays? If the recipe were titled "Red-cooked duck with
>mushrooms", and turned out to be lots and lots of [duck] with mushrooms as
>a garnish, it seems as if there should be these postings:
>Duck, red-cooked, with mushrooms, xx
>Mushrooms, red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx
>(or maybe Mushrooms, in red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx)
>Red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx
>But if the recipe were very mushroom intensive, it seems more appropriate to
>have these postings:
>Duck, red-cooked, with mushrooms, xx
>Mushrooms, with red-cooked duck, xx
>Red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx
I would not change the recipe title as in:
Mushrooms, with red-cooked duck
I figure the recipe author knows what he or she wants, and the index should
reflect that.
I would also not put:
Mushrooms, red-cooked duck with mushrooms
even if I was using recipe titles in full as subentries. In cases like this,
I would drop the last word for ease of reading:
Mushrooms, red-cooked duck with
Lastly, I would only put the recipe title as a main heading:
Red-cooked duck with mushrooms
if there was plenty of room, or if this was a Chinese cookbook and
"red-cooked" was an important concept.
Hope this helps!
Elinor
>
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 06:08:16 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: Carolyn Weaver <cweaver@U.WASHINGTON.EDU>
Subject: Re: Literary Market Place
In-Reply-To: <9606291626.AA03881@mx4.u.washington.edu>
Writer's Market is an affordable annual publication ($29.95 or so) that is
available from bookstores. Literary Market Place is a reference work
(also annual) that you should be able to find in most public libraries.
Last time I checked the cost was well over $100, which was more than I'm
willing to spend for an annual.
Carolyn Weaver
Bellevue, Wa.
e-mail: cweaver@u.washington.edu
voice: 206/930-4348
On Sat, 29 Jun 1996 Infojo6363@AOL.COM wrote:
> Is Literary Market Place the same as Writers Market Place or are these two
> entirely different books?
>
> I am familiar with the annual Writer's M P, as its commonly found in any
> bookstore. If its not the same as Literary M P, could someone provide the
> ISBN or pub details?
>
> TIA
> JP
>
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 10:57:13 -0500
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.BITNET>
From: "Neva J. Smith" <njsmith@BGA.COM>
Subject: Newsletter about copyright for freelancers' work
The newsletter below discusses contracts used by writers and publishers
and their provisions for electronic rights, royalties, etc. The target
audience is the freelance writers' community. Indexers are writers and I
think we should keep up with the contract activities of this group.
The work made for hire issue is also discussed.
Neva
> = - * - = < = > = - * - = < = > = - * - = < = > = - * - = < =
Neva J. Smith, MLIS DataSmiths Information Services
PO Box 2157 / Round Rock, TX 78680
email: njsmith@bga.com
voice: (512) 244-2767 Editor, _Library Currents_
PO Box 2199 / Round Rock, TX 78680
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: 28 Jun 96 08:44:57 EDT
From: Alexandra Owens/ASJA <75227.1650@CompuServe.COM>
To: ASJACW-LIST@SILVERQUICK.COM
Subject: CW960628
ASJA CONTRACTS WATCH CW960628 Issued June 28, 1996
[The American Society of Journalists and Authors encourages reproduction and
distribution of this document for the benefit of freelance writers. Reprint or
post as many items as you wish, but please credit ASJA for the information and
don't change the content.]
*****
Despite a history of insisting on the contrary (and losing some writers in the
process), CONDE NAST, it seems, can accept the important principle of separate
compensation for electronic rights. Persistent negotiating has given one
writer a BRIDE'S agreement in which the fee is allocated "$X for print rights,
$Y for electronic rights." The e-rights clause itself remains far too broad,
but the division of the fee is a small but significant concession from one of
the most aggressively hardline publishers.
Persistence has also brought about further improvement at another publishing
giant, HACHETTE FILIPACCHI. The company has long agreed to an extra fee for
e-rights for authors who require it. Its HOME magazine has been willing to
accept limited rights for the fee but the group's largest title, WOMAN'S DAY,
has insisted on all formats for all time. Now, WD has agreed for at least one
writer that the e-rights supplement will cover only America Online, and only
for a year.
At GRUNER + JAHR, confusion reigns--again--as the company apparently can't
make up its corporate mind whether to bully writers or not. Various editors at
PARENTS and McCALL'S have been telling contributors that until a new contract
form is released, they absolutely must have free e-rights, although they
typically offer to lower the time period from three years to one year. But the
editors-in-chief of both magazines tell ASJA Contracts Watch that isn't so.
The company still isn't ready to pay for new-media reuses, as some key
competitors now do, but according to these top editors, at least, they will
still--reluctantly--cross out the nefarious e-rights clause.
It isn't all e-rights: All three publishers commonly accept important
amendments in several other clauses in their contract offer. Freelancers doing
business with any CN, Hachette or G + J magazines may request information
about those changes from ASJA.
*****
Following discussions with ASJA, the new owner of MS., WORKING MOTHER and
WORKING WOMAN this week pledged to introduce a new contract that pays extra
for all secondary uses of freelance material, including electronic. But to
those owed money for works delivered to the magazines' old owner he makes no
promises at all.
Jay MacDonald stepped into something of a hornet's nest when, just weeks ago,
his spanking new MACDONALD COMMUNICATIONS CORP. bought the three magazines
from the long-ailing LANG COMMUNICATIONS. The buzzing came from freelance
contributors and staffers left holding Lang IOUs; now, as writers and some
organizations step up activity, the buzzing is turning into stinging. Several
writers lately have won court judgments against Lang, but collecting may be
another story. Yesterday, however, having failed to extract a payment from
Lang, a writer sued MacDonald in New York City small claims court. Earlier
this month, MacDonald memoed staffers that they could make claims against Lang
for "all accrued fringe benefits or pay to which each of you perceives herself
or himself to be entitled." He also told the New York Times that the legal
obligation for Lang's debts to freelancers remains with Lang. Presumably,
courts will decide.
In a gesture to writers, photographers and illustrators, MacDonald told ASJA:
"We will have a new contract with the creative community that ensures separate
compensation over and above one-time print use in whatever aftermarket a
contribution is used, including other media we plan to develop." To the
question of making good on Lang's debts to freelancers, whether for work
published or for pieces in inventory, he would say only, "We're working on
it."
ASJA President Claire Safran, who has written to MacDonald of the "ethical
obligations" to contributors, said yesterday, "We applaud the promise to do
the right thing in contracts for future work, and hope these magazines get
back on their feet so that freelancers will again be comfortable doing
business with them. But we have to wonder how much faith to put in this
company while contributors continue to wait for money owed them."
*****
The threat of work made for hire has been beaten back in radioland. Late last
year, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO told independent writer-producers that it would
insist on total ownership of their work because, a spokesman said, "That's
what we need to do." Apparently, the need evaporated when the independents
said "No way." After months of meetings with a coalition of independents,
during which NPR chief operatin officer Peter Jablow himself replaced the
in-house lawyer, the sides have tossed out work-made-for-hire. Their
agreement, just signed, calls for negotiated fees for rebroadcasts and
royalties for sales of tapes and transcripts. Most important, it declares
that revenues from electronic and other ancillary uses should be shared. The
agreement calls for an 18-month grace period, during which NPR will pay no
royalties for new-media use of freelance material while it develops a tracking
system. Compensation will be negotiated after the end of 1997 or when NPR's
new-media gross reaches $1,250,000. In the meantime, NPR has pledged to "use
reasonable efforts to track revenues" from new-media uses and issue individual
reports every six months. "NPR is so close to the edge these days," said one
independent, "that we're willing to pitch in to help. If this weren't the
non-profit world we never would have made the concession on the grace period."
Said Jablow: "We are committed to developing a win-win association when it
comes to distributing NPR programming via non-broadcast means."
*****
A freelancer caught VEGETARIAN TIMES (COWLES) putting a work into electronic
databases, despite a contract that didn't allow it. The writer confronted the
publisher, which pulled the piece and eventually offered $700. The writer
accepted. Then came a release form with a shut-your-mouth clause, asking the
writer to say she hadn't and wouldn't talk. "I can't sign it," she told
Cowles. "I've already discussed every step of the the settlement with ASJA."
"OK," the publisher agreed. "Just say you won't talk about it any more." And
so this report can't give the end of the story.
*****
Many ASJA members and others send a steady stream of contracts, information
and
scuttlebutt so that these ASJA Contracts Watch dispatches can be as
informative as possible. Thanks to all.
To receive each edition of ASJA Contracts Watch automatically (and at no
charge) by e-mail, send the following Internet message:
To: ASJA-MANAGER@SILVERQUICK.COM
Text: JOIN ASJACW-LIST
Only occasional official dispatches: no feedback, no flooded mailbox.
Inquiries and information from all are welcome.
Contracts Committee, ASJA
1501 Broadway, New York, NY 10036
tel 212-997-0947
fax 212-768-7414
e-mail 75227.1650@compuserve.com
Web page http://www.asja.org/