From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 12-AUG-1997 14:53:49.52
To: CIRJA02
CC:
Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9705D"
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 14:32:42 +0000
From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a)
<LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu>
Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9705D"
To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 00:04:41 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: John Wilson <JWilson999@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: where's the mail?
Well, I'm "glad" to see other folks struggling with generating business, too.
I'm also a new indexer and, while I haven't really started the marketing
blitz in earnest and I haven't quit my day job, deciding how to attack this
thing and generate business is a real quandary. I'm looking for help, ideas,
suggestions, whatever I can get from those of you out there who've already
been there and done that. (It sounds as if sending out a "bulk" mailing
(like in a job search) is a low percentage bet (??).)
Thanks, folks!!
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 21:47:53 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Charles R. Anderson" <c.anderson.seattle@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: Timekeep Program
Those who do not cover all bases are doomed to repeat things - for those of
you who have e-mailed me directly for a mailing address to try out my
DOS-based Timekeeping program here it is:
Charles Anderson
PO Box 15642
Seattle, WA 98115-0642
Sorry to take up bandwidth here - I should have given this in my earlier
posting.
Charles Anderson
c.anderson.seattle@worldnet.att.net
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 12:53:19 +0800
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: paul cowan <pcowan@NEWTON.DIALIX.COM.AU>
unsubscribe
Here are some actual maintenance complaints submitted by US Air Force
pilots and the replies from the maintenance crews. "Squawks" are problem
listings that pilots generally leave for maintenance crews.
Problem: "Dead bugs on windshield."
Solution: "Live bugs on order."
Problem: "Number three engine missing."
Solution: "Engine found on right wing after brief search."
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 07:27:22 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Cynthia Bertelsen <cbertel@USIT.NET>
Subject: Disability insurance? (was Where's the Mail?)
Does anyone know of an insurance company that provides disability insurance
(for indexers' eyes--sort of like the insurance that Lloyd's of London
provided for that 1940s actress's legs--what was her name)? I have often
thought that if something happened to my eyes, I'd be out of business.
Also--
At 02:54 PM 5/21/97 -0500, Laura Rustin wrote:
>I have just assumed that at first, people were in Winston-Salem, and then
>they were back home catching up. But now I realize that it is Wednesday
>already, and ?????
And we're STILL catching up! From the look of the mail bag this a.m., we
must be back in business on INDEX-L, however.
*****************************************
Cynthia D. Bertelsen--Indexer
cbertel@usit.net
Web page: http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html
*****************************************
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 07:10:56 -0600
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Caroline Parks <caroline@MACK.RT66.COM>
Subject: Vocabulary control & xrefs
In-Reply-To: <199705221128.FAA26140@Rt66.com>
Welcome back from W-S, everyone! Wish I'd been there...instead I've been
tearing my hair out over the index for a poorly edited book. (This isn't
just me grumbling about the state of publishing, which I certainly do
regularly! The ME says they know the copyeditor isn't working out...)
So here's *one* of the problems with this book: I'm faced with a number of
concepts for which there are at least two, and often three or more, terms
used throughout the book. Here's an example:
Add Log phase, 429, 431
Logging phase, 395
Update Logs phase, 276
These all refer to the same thing, but on none of these pages are either of
the other two terms mentioned. According to Nancy Mulvany's book, which is
the only reference I have in my hand at the moment, See refs are used in
situations like this to minimize scattering of information throughout the
index. but if I do this:
Add Log phase, 276, 395, 429, 431
Logging phase. See Add Log phase
Update Logs phase. See Add Log phase
then the reader looking for "Add Log phase" on page 276 won't find it.
On the other hand, if I do this:
Add Log phase, 429, 431
See also Logging phase; Update Logs phase
Logging phase, 395
See also Add Log phase; Update Logs phase
Update Logs phase, 276
See also Add Log phase; Logging phase
then I've got that information spread out all over the place.
So I'm taking a vote! Is it more important to give the reader explicit
information about what they'll find on a particular page? Or is the reader
better served by finding both explicit and (essentially) implicit
information in the same place in the index?
Eagerly awaiting the collective wisdom of INDEX-L!
____________________________
Caroline Parks -- Indexcellence
Indexing and Editorial Services
Tijeras, NM
505-286-2738
caroline@rt66.com
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 07:36:14 -0600
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Philip and Heather Jones <hpjones@RT66.COM>
Subject: Vocabulary control & xrefs
Caroline,
When I get a situation like this, sometimes I can get around it by putting
the synonyms in parens after the main entry, so that
>Add Log phase, 429, 431
>Logging phase, 395
>Update Logs phase, 276
becomes
Add Log phase (Logging Phase, Update Logs phase) 276,395, 429, 431
Logging phase. See Add Log phase
Update Logs phase. See Add Log phase
Heather
/---------------------------------------------------------------------\
| There are such things as cause and effect, but they have nothing to |
| do with each other... |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Phil, Heather, Doug and Ivy Jones hpjones@rt66.com |
| Los Alamos, NM |
\---------------------------------------------------------------------/
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 06:33:48 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Pam Rider <prider@POWERGRID.ELECTRICITI.COM>
Subject: Re: Vocabulary control & xrefs
At 07:10 AM 5/22/97 -0600, Caroline asked about:
ms
>used throughout the book. Here's an example:
>
>Add Log phase, 429, 431
>Logging phase, 395
>Update Logs phase, 276
>
Which logically--although I missed mention of the book's subject--I would
enter as:
Log phase
adding, 429, 431
logging, 395
updating, 276
Adding phases. See also (etc.)
Logging phases. See also (etc.)
Updating. See also (etc.)
Context could certainly mandate your choices. It's just I have learned to
search and create indexes with an emphasis on nouns.
Pam Rider
Trying to walk cheerfully on the Earth
prider@powergrid.electriciti.com
prider@tsktsk.com
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 09:38:10 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Sharon Wright <SHARONW@MICHIE.COM>
Subject: Vocabulary control & xrefs -Reply
I work for a legal publishing company and we run into
this all the time-- legislators come up with remarkably
diverse ways of saying the same thing! Our policy is
to index under one main heading and put in "See lines"
from the other, collateral headings. That way the user
can feel certain that the information under any given
heading is reasonably complete. As a former
researcher, I can say that I found "See also" lines
frustrating and annoying-- they make you unsure that
you have all of the information that you need and can
lead to a grand tour of the whole bloody index! If you
believe that the purpose of an index is to get the user
OUT of the index and into the text as soon as possible,
"See also" lines defeat that purpose. Our policy here is
to not use them at all.
Hope this helps!
>>> Caroline Parks <caroline@MACK.RT66.COM>
05/22/97 09:10am >>>
Welcome back from W-S, everyone! Wish I'd been
there...instead I've been tearing my hair out over the
index for a poorly edited book. (This isn't just me
grumbling about the state of publishing, which I
certainly do regularly! The ME says they know the
copyeditor isn't working out...)
So here's *one* of the problems with this book: I'm
faced with a number of concepts for which there are at
least two, and often three or more, terms used
throughout the book. Here's an example:
Add Log phase, 429, 431
Logging phase, 395
Update Logs phase, 276
These all refer to the same thing, but on none of these
pages are either of the other two terms mentioned.
According to Nancy Mulvany's book, which is the only
reference I have in my hand at the moment, See refs
are used in situations like this to minimize scattering of
information throughout the index. but if I do this:
Add Log phase, 276, 395, 429, 431
Logging phase. See Add Log phase
Update Logs phase. See Add Log phase
then the reader looking for "Add Log phase" on page
276 won't find it.
On the other hand, if I do this:
Add Log phase, 429, 431
See also Logging phase; Update Logs phase
Logging phase, 395
See also Add Log phase; Update Logs phase
Update Logs phase, 276
See also Add Log phase; Logging phase
then I've got that information spread out all over the
place.
So I'm taking a vote! Is it more important to give the
reader explicit information about what they'll find on a
particular page? Or is the reader better served by
finding both explicit and (essentially) implicit
information in the same place in the index?
Eagerly awaiting the collective wisdom of INDEX-L!
____________________________
Caroline Parks -- Indexcellence
Indexing and Editorial Services
Tijeras, NM
505-286-2738 caroline@rt66.com
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 10:10:09 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Sanindex@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Disability insurance? (was Where's the Mail?)
As soon as I can get caught up, I will be investigating disability insurance.
So look for some information by fall. And once I get my information, it will
need to be approved by board. That will not be until November at the
earliest. Sandi Schroeder
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 09:40:51 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Maro Riofrancos <riofrancos@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: en dashes; Cindex
In ASCII, the code for a hyphen is 45 and for an en dash is 196. However,
in Windows the code for an en dash is 150 (and 151 for an em dash),
assuming you use a standard font such as Times New Roman. In Cindex, if
you're going to be exporting your index as an RTF file (so you can then
convert it into a Word file, for example), you can set your page number
connector as ASCII 196 in the SET REF and SET FORMAT options (by pressing
Alt+Shift+196), and Cindex will correctly convert it to ASCII 150 when it
creates the RTF file. When you open that file in Word, the en dashes will
be there.
The discussion of this in Cindex is a bit dense, and the index of the
Cindex manual is both inaccurate and unintuitive. It lists a reference to
PAGE REF:connector [in the SET REF options], but gives the wrong page
number-114, when the discussion is actually on page 115. There is no entry
to the PAGE REFS:connector option in the SET FORMAT options, discussed on
pp. 171-72, although there is a reference to PAGE REFS:...format settings.
There is also an entry for "Connecting character, in page references,"
which actually gives the correct page number for the SET REF option,
although the page number is listed as a miscellaneous undifferentiated
number. There is subheading under this entry for "in formatted index,"
which gives the pages for the discussion of the SET FORMAT options. Under
the heading for "Page references," which is probably where most users would
first turn, the only reference to this topic is buried as a See reference
after a sub-subheading (Page references/inclusive range/denoting).
Maro Riofrancos
Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
290 Riverside Drive, 9A
New York, NY 10025
Voice: 212.864.2121
Fax: 212.222.2921
Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Vicki Birchfield [SMTP:vbirchfield@APPLIEDVOICE.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 1997 9:23 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list INDEX-L
Subject: Re: en dashes
I'm new to indexing too, but I've been a programmer for a long time. But
don't hold it against me - I don't think indexing is something machines
will ever do well. Computers and software should be useful tools for human
beings, not replacements for them. From what I've gathered from listening
to this group, it seems that the indexing software tools you all use could
stand some improvement.
Anyway, I think I know the secret to the "alt 196" (usually seen in
computer manuals as <alt>) mystery.
196 is an extended ascii code for a dash graphics character. It's hard to
tell from looking at the ascii chart I have, but it looks longer than the
character at 45, which is another dash, the one you get from a standard
qwerty keyboard. So my guess is that your software is using 'alt 45'
("-") for the en dash, 'alt 196' for the em dash. Too bad there wasn't
an entry in the index. ;-) Hope this helps.
Vicki Birchfield
vbirch@accessone.com
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 10:16:17 -0500
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Rashidah Z. Hakeem" <rzhakeem@MECCA.MECCA.ORG>
Subject: Re: where's the mail?
In-Reply-To: <9705211922.AA04707@bme1.utmem.edu>
They are together in person at the conference in Winston-Salem, I suspect.
On Wed, 21 May 1997, Sue Tortora wrote:
> I'm currently receiving an unusually small amount of mail from Index-L. Are
> people just not writing or is there a problem? I usually receive about 20
> items per day (except weekends) and for the past few weekdays less than 7
> have arrived. Of course the amount of junk mail has increased tremendously
> :-)
>
> By the way, I am still waiting for my first client. I sent out at least 100
> letters with few responses and no offers. I'm trying to be patient, but it's
> getting discouraging.
>
>
> Sue Tortora
> Tortora Indexing Services
>
********************************************************************************
Rashidah Z. Hakeem, M L S rzhakeem@mecca.mecca.org
M E C C A
(Memphis Educational Computer Connectivity Alliance) http://www.mecca.org/
LeMoyne-Owen College voice: (901) 942-6227 fax: (901) 942-6272
********************************************************************************
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 11:44:44 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: JPerlman@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Vocabulary control & xrefs
Caroline,
I would use one as the place to put all of the information, use See x-refs to
it, and put the alternative ways describing the phenomenon in parens ....
just as Heather suggested. It's not elegant, but it is functional, and
follows the First Rule of Indexing (such as it may be) that we not scatter
information throughout the index.
But ... one caveat. Just be absolutely certain that these things mean
exactly the same thing, and aren't describing different aspects of something.
In that case, Pam's suggestion is the better of them. The parens thing
requires that there be exact parity between the different expressions/terms.
Wish you could have gone to ASI Conference! It was a good one! Some good
learning and fraternizing for many of us there!
Janet Perlman
Southwest Indexing
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 11:44:48 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: JPerlman@AOL.COM
Subject: New Indexers: Finding Work
Quite a few of you have written looking for ideas and encouragement while
beginning to market yourselves as indexers. John wrote "It sounds as if
sending out a "bulk" mailing (like in a job search) is a low percentage bet
(??)."
As one who has been there and done that, I can tell you that that kind of
mailing is the *only* way to do it. You need to be out there meeting people,
also ... networking, introducing yourself to publishers and authors (don't
forget them!). You need to get your name out there, where people who are
looking for indexers can find it... and you.
So the idea of "bulk mailings" -- lots of letters going out to publishers
with your credentials and name and phone number -- are vital. It does take
time. Don't be discouraged (I know that's not easy!). People keep those
letters for a long time. Often it doesn't pan out right away, but you are
placing yourself for the future. People don't respond to that kind of
mailing, usually. They *do*, however, hold onto the resumes. So don't
despair.
I can tell you that I still market myself that way, with letters to select,
targeted, groups of publishers or potential clients .... even after 20 plus
years in the field. I keep marketing myself.
The rate of return is low. I find that I get about a 3% rate of response. I
get maybe 1 or 2 new clients out of each 100 letters I send out. I still
send them out. That is a pretty standard number -- it is one sales people
use universally as the rate of return on a "cold" mailing or "cold" calling
campaign. It's nothing new. You can only expect that much. Obviously, if
you want more then 1 or 2 clients, you market with more than 100 letters.
So keep the faith, those of you who are sending mail out. Keep sending it
out. And follow up, too! It's true -- editors are busy people, and if
you're there when they need you, if you are on the phone, or your resume
arrives on their desk at the moment they need an indexer, you *may* be *it*!
Janet Perlman
Southwest Indexing
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 10:56:47 -0500
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Carol Roberts <Carol.Roberts@MIXCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: where's the mail?
In-Reply-To: <199705220415.XAA22504@mixcom.mixcom.com>
>I have just assumed that at first, people were in Winston-Salem, and then
>they were back home catching up. But now I realize that it is Wednesday
>already, and ?????
>
>Laura Rustin
That's about how long it takes to catch up on one's sleep and work after
one of those things. People should start drifting back to the list soon.
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: Thu, 22 May 1997 12:13:39 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Paul Corrington <PaulCorri@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: master index, updating
Dawn -
Thanks for the information. Sorry that I'm late in getting this thank you
out to you. I attended the ASI national conference last week and had to get a
book out by yesterday. Now I'm going through a week's worth of e-mail.
Thanks again for the information. If you ever need help with a book or
project, please let me know.
Paul Corrington voice: (602) 827-8904
Corrington Indexing Service fax: (602) 827-1182
2647 East Kenwood e-mail: Paul Corri@aol.com
Mesa, Arizona 85213
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 10:19:50 EDT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Larry Baker/GRI/International Thomson Publishing
<Larry_Baker@GALE.COM>
Subject: En-dash preference from one publisher
My preference (and this is just one person's opinion from one publisher) is to
use a unique character (as somebody already mentioned) in place of an en-dash,
if possible. (Something like "@" or "#" ... anything that you are confident
isn't going to be somewhere else in the text.) Then that symbol can be changed
globally on our end.
Larry Baker
Gale Research
Larry_Baker@gale.com
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 13:02:14 -0500
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Carol Roberts <Carol.Roberts@MIXCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: en dash (was: where's the mail?)
In-Reply-To: <199705220415.XAA22504@mixcom.mixcom.com>
Jean, in the Mac version of Cindex (you didn't say which platform you're
working on), the default is set to produce an en dash for page ranges. If I
wanted to change it, I could do so in the "page references" window in the
"document" menu. Although it looks like a hyphen on the screen, it does
print out as an en dash when I change the whole document to Palatino.
Dave Ream added:
>The en dash is used to specify number ranges and chapter=96page. The
>196 is what Cindex uses by default for page number connector.
It's also used for compound adjectives that contain open compounds:
New York--London flight
post--Civil War period
[pretend those are en dashes]
So you could conceivably need an en dash in the main or the subentry field,
not just in page ranges. I don't remember how to do it in DOS, but it's
option-hyphen on a Mac, and it seems to travel well in Microsoft Word.
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: Thu, 22 May 1997 14:48:12 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Sarah H Lemaire <shl@WORLD.STD.COM>
Subject: Tabs, mylar tabs
In-Reply-To: <199705221625.AA06303@world.std.com>
I got the following question from a prospective employer via e-mail today.
Does anyone know what it means? I'm a bit wary of sending out my resume
to this person without knowing more although he got my name from the
Freelance Editorial Association directory which publishes my name,
address, and phone.
Here's the question: In your indexing do you use tabs or, even mylar tabs?
I guess my answer is no but I wonder what it means to use tabs or mylar
tabs? I use a computer!
Sarah
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 16:12:52 -0400
Reply-To: riomaro@riofrancos.com
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Maro Riofrancos <riomaro@RIOFRANCOS.COM>
Organization: Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
Subject: en-dashes; Cindex
In ASCII, the code for a hyphen is 45 and for an en dash is 196.
However, in Windows the code for an en dash is 150 (and 151 for an em
dash), assuming you use a standard font such as Times New Roman. In
Cindex, if you're going to be exporting your index as an RTF file (so
you can then convert it into a Word file, for example), you can set your
page number connector as ASCII 196 in the SET REF and SET FORMAT options
(by pressing Alt+Shift+196), and Cindex will correctly convert it to
ASCII 150 when it creates the RTF file. When you open that file in Word,
the en dashes will be there.
The discussion of this in Cindex is a bit dense, and the index of the
Cindex manual is both inaccurate and unintuitive. It lists a reference
to PAGE REF:connector [in the SET REF options], but gives the wrong page
number--114, when the discussion is actually on page 115. There is no
entry to the PAGE REFS:connector option in the SET FORMAT options,
discussed on pp. 171-72, although there is a reference to PAGE
REFS: format settings. There is also an entry for "Connecting character,
in page references," which actually gives the correct page number for
the SET REF option, although the page number is listed as a
miscellaneous undifferentiated number. There is subheading under this
entry for "in formatted index," which gives the pages for the discussion
of the SET FORMAT options. Under the heading for "Page references,"
which is probably where most users would first turn, the only reference
to this topic is buried as a See reference after a sub-subheading (Page
references/inclusive range/denoting).
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 16:59:48 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Barbara Cohen <BECohen653@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: New Indexers: Finding Work
Dear New Indexers,
Regarding Janet's comments, I would second the opinion that you need to keep
doing marketing, no matter how long you have been in business. It does get
easier as time goes by, because the more work you have done, the easier it is
to get people to notice your letter. In marketing, as in so much else,
"diligence is the mother of good luck."
However, I don't believe in sending out 100 letters at a time. I suggest to
my trainees sending out 5 well-researched and personally addressed letters
per week. That way if anyone hires you from the first batch, you haven't used
up your list of possible clients to contact after that first assignment is
done.
In other words, if you have a list of 100 possible clients, you have plans
for 20 weeks' worth of marketing letters--which inherently means that each
letter will be fresher, but also means you don't send everything out one day
and spend 20 weeks being glum because you haven't heard from anyone. Put
another way, plan to "be in business" for 20 weeks, even if you have no
paying work. Your job for those 20 weeks is to write excellent, personal, and
specifically targeted marketing letters (at the rate of one per day). I
guarantee that by week 20 your letter will look quite different from what you
wrote in week 1. Also, each week you then have fewer cold calls to make...
and maybe one of them will lead to a project. (I personally would not be able
to face 100 cold calls, but I could face one per day!)
I have used this plan for marketing and I have yet to make it to the bottom
of my list of "presses I would like to work with." (In fact, I have revised
the list several times over the years, but I have never "used up" all of my
potential clients, so I always feel that there are new horizons ahead, even
on those days or weeks when the phone is quiet. This is an excellent way to
trick yourself into feeling hopeful when it seems like finding work is
completely hopeless.)
Just my thoughts on the subject...
Barbara
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 14:09:07 LCL
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Victoria Baker <vbaker@MCN.ORG>
Subject: Re: Vocabulary control & xrefs
In-Reply-To: <199705221330.GAA16645@dns1.mcn.org>
Just to say that only a couple of weeks ago I posted this same problem and
decided to do what Heather has suggested. Although I try to avoid
parenthetical comments on my entries, this is one case where they are more
than justified.
I would agree, though, as to the necessity for the terms being truly used
in the work you are indexing as synonyms. (Understanding that in some
subjects an author may legitimately use words as synonyms, the use of which
another person in the field might disagree with.)
Victoria
vbaker@mcn.org
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 19:19:36 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: DStaub11@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: getting work
Jean wrote:
> I also found my first
>mailing to be too dry to solicit a response. The letters I did get a
>response to were the one's that were more on a personal level,
>explaining my insane desire to index the book that even the author
>wouldn't do.
I agree. When I did my first major marketing effort (1989) I used cold calls,
not letters, but the same principle applied: the two clients I got first
(with enough work to keep me moderately busy for a while) were the editors
with whom I'd gotten into personal chats (mostly about irrelevant stuff)--a
personal connection. Couldn't tell if it was coincidence, but I don't think
so. Also, often when I'd call back to "check in" someone would just happen to
have a job on hand and would give it to me. Remember the most important
thing: you're not asking them for something, you're offering them something
they need.
Good luck! Do Mi
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 17:09:34 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Kari Bero <bero@CYBERSPACE.COM>
Subject: Indexing Software (was: New Kid needs Info)
In-Reply-To: <33837182.6C8D@worldnet.att.net>
Just a reminder that the ASI Web Site includes a list of dedicated
indexing software programs, and descriptions of how different kinds of
software is used during the indexing process.
For those of you who don't have web access, I've included the text of that
page below.
-Kari
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
American Society of Indexers (ASI)
http://www.well.com/user/asi/
ASI Web Committee:
Kari Bero (webmaster)
Lori Lathrop
Seth Maislin (co-webmaster)
Lynn Moncrief
Janet Perlman (ASI board representative)
Charlotte Skuster
Neva Smith
Jan Wright
Pilar Wyman (chair)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
________________________________________________________________
Indexing tools
The software tools used to generate indexes come in many flavors and
varieties. Which technique is used depends on variables such as budget,
eventual re-usability of the source material, time constraints, media used
to publish the material, file sizes and transferral issues, and individual
preferences. There are essentially six different methodologies for
indexing:
Standalone or Dedicated tools, usually used for back-of-the-book
indexes, allow indexers to work from page-numbered galleys. The indexing
is completely separate from the published material. Dedicated indexing
tools are listed below.
Embedding tools allow indexing codes to be embedded in the electronic
text of a book or file, and the index's locators are updated as text
changes. Indexers must work in the same files as the publishers.
Tagging tools allow indexing codes to be embedded in the electronic
text after the indexing is complete. The indexer inserts numbered dummy
tags in the files, and then builds the index separately. The final step
uses macros to insert the indexing at each tag in the files. Many of these
tools are developed in-house to fit the publishing group's needs.
Keywording is used primarily in online help materials. It can be
hard-coded jumps, similar to WWW links, or it can be inserted as embedded
coding and built into a list by the software.
Automated indexing software, a tool that now accompanies most
word-processing software, builds a concordance, or a word list, from
processed files. Although the manufacturers often claim these packages
build indexes, the actual results are a list of words and phrases,
sometimes useful in the beginning stages of building an index. Usability
tests of these packages have shown that the word lists omit many key ideas
and phrases, and cannot fine-tune terminology for easy retrieval, or build
the needed hierarchies of ideas that professional indexing can.
Free-text and weighted-text searching tools are not discussed in
these pages, but are aspects of information retrieval that indexers are
very interested in.
Dedicated Indexing Software
Note: Our goal is to provide a list of dedicated software geared toward
professional indexers in general. Indexers certainly use other software
packages in their work as needed, and to list all the available tools
would be an enormous task. We also do not want to cross the line between
providing useful product information and providing advertising.
Cindex
Indexing Research
Box 18609
Rochester, New York 14618
(716) 461-5530
FAX: (716) 442-3924
ircindex@aol.com
HyperIndex (for Macs)
Andre De Tienne
Peirce Edition Project, IUPUI
CA 545, 425 University Blvd
Indianapolis, IN 46202-5140
(317) 274-2033
Adetienn@iupui.edu
IndexAid2
Santa Barbara Software Products
1400 Dover Road
Santa Barbara, CA 93103
(805) 963-4886
Indexer's Assistant
INQUIRY
195 Sunny Hill Road
Northampton, PA 18067
(215) 837-9615
INDEXX
Norman Swartz
1053 Ridley Drive
Burnaby, BC V5A 2N7
Canada
(604) 420-7454
swartz@sfu.ca
IN>SORT
Kensa Software
P.O. Box 4415
Northbrook, IL 60065
(708) 559-0297
Macrex
Bayside Indexing Service
P.O. Box 3051
Daly City, CA 95015-0051
(415) 756-0821
FAX: (415) 757-1567
Macrex@aol.com
SKY Index for Windows
SKY Software
4675 York One Rd
Lineboro, MD 21102
Voice and FAX: (410) 374-3484
email@sky-software.com
wINDEX
Susan Holbert Indexing Services
24 Harris Street
Waltham, MA 02154-6105
(617) 893-0514
FAX: (617) 894-4665
susanh@world.std.com
________________________________________________________________
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 08:02:31 +0800
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: paul cowan <pcowan@NEWTON.DIALIX.COM.AU>
unsubscribe Paul Cowan INDEX-L
Here are some actual maintenance complaints submitted by US Air Force
pilots and the replies from the maintenance crews. "Squawks" are problem
listings that pilots generally leave for maintenance crews.
Problem: "Dead bugs on windshield."
Solution: "Live bugs on order."
Problem: "Number three engine missing."
Solution: "Engine found on right wing after brief search."
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 08:04:26 +0800
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: paul cowan <pcowan@NEWTON.DIALIX.COM.AU>
unsubscribe index-l
Here are some actual maintenance complaints submitted by US Air Force
pilots and the replies from the maintenance crews. "Squawks" are problem
listings that pilots generally leave for maintenance crews.
Problem: "Dead bugs on windshield."
Solution: "Live bugs on order."
Problem: "Number three engine missing."
Solution: "Engine found on right wing after brief search."
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 20:26:14 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Locatelli@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: New Kid needs Info
With indexing programs, as with most things in life, you get what you pay
for. Both CINDEX and Macrex are full-featured programs that can do most
anything an indexer might want to do in the way of manipulating the
information in the index. Sky and other less expensive programs give up some
of that flexibility for speed of learning and low cost.
So which should you buy? How serious are you about indexing. I suffered
through using WordPerfect for my first two indexes, and when it became clear
that I would be indexing on a regular basis, I opted for one of the
professional programs--CINDEX, to be specific. If one were going to be
indexing only small projects or only occasionally then one of the cheaper
programs might be OK.
Fred Leise
Between the LInes Indexing and Editorial Services
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 22:58:29 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Craig Brown <LastWord@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Subject: Snoozers
Jean Perla writes of gratitude for work, even if the book is a snoozer. =
I
agree. Still, some of the stuff that I've worked on lately makes me wish=
I
DID have a book on the lunar cycles of the celestial warthog. There hav=
e
been times when I have considered hiring an assistant to rush into my
office every half hour or so, screaming and banging a gong to wake me up.=
=
Sometimes I fear that I will fall asleep and hit my head on the desk on t=
he
way down. I call it the MEGO cycle. Mine Eyes Glaze Over. Yet, I am
grateful. Perhaps someone can explain that to me.
In any case, I have another reason for writing to the list. The local (S=
t.
Louis) alternative newspaper--The Riverfront Times--ran an article on me
and indexing in the May 21-27 issue. It is in a column called "Mississip=
pi
Mud" by Wm. Stage. Unfortunately, they didn't include it in their web
page. So far, it has generated one call from a poor soul who has inherit=
ed
the task of preparing the index for a deceased friend's book. He has no
budget and expects no revenues from the book so he isn't willing to pay
anyone else to do the index. But I digress. If anyone is interested in
seeing a copy of the column, let me know.
Cheers,
Craig Brown
The Last Word =
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 23:01:45 PDT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Deborah Stewart <dmstewart@ABTS.NET>
Subject: Re: Vocabulary control & xrefs
In-Reply-To: <199705221319.JAA14614@mail.abts.net>
Caroline,
Good to see a posting from you!
Quickly, I prefer the suggestion by Pam Rider
Log phase
adding, xxx
phasing, xxx
etc, xx
rather than the parenthetical example.
I do use parenthetical entries and qualifiers in some of my indexes,
but for the example you had I prefered the main entry with subs.
Missed you at ASI
Hope all is well
I will get in touch later when there is more time!
dms
"Language is the dress of Thought."
Stewart Indexing Service
dmstewart@abts.net
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 00:30:17 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: John Wilson <JWilson999@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Snoozers
Yes, Mr. Brown, I'd like a copy of the article. Address: John Wilson, P. O.
Box 920123, Norcross, GA 30092-0123.
Thanks.
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 23:14:46 -0600
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Caroline Parks <caroline@MACK.RT66.COM>
Subject: Re: Vocabulary control & xrefs--thanks!
In-Reply-To: <199705221336.HAA11947@Rt66.com>
Thanks so much to everyone for your thoughts on this question!
Along with what I think is a workable solution (Heather's), I also got a
good lesson in how something that's perfectly obvious to me (because I've
been practically *dreaming* about this index lately!) could actually be
almost obscure to a fresh, uninvolved eye!
The terms I used in my example :
Add Log phase, 429, 431
Logging phase, 395
Update Logs phase, 276
are all given as titles of the same phase in the life cycle of an HTTP
request being processed on a Netscape server (aren't you glad you asked?)
The life cycle is described in four different places over three chapters;
there are eight or nine phases. Several of the phases actually have the
same title in three out of the four descriptions (!); the others are graced
with three different names. So I do feel safe in wrapping all the titles
for a given phase up together with parentheses.
So Pam's solution, unfortunately, won't work
>
>Log phase
> adding, 429, 431
> logging, 395
> updating, 276
>
>Adding phases. See also (etc.)
>
>Logging phases. See also (etc.)
>
>Updating. See also (etc.)
>
But it certainly makes sense if you don't know the context!
Back to work...it's gonna be a late one!
Thanks again,
Caroline
____________________________
Caroline Parks -- Indexcellence
Indexing and Editorial Services
Tijeras, NM
505-286-2738
caroline@rt66.com
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 06:45:02 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Cynthia Bertelsen <cbertel@USIT.NET>
Subject: Re: New Indexers: Finding Work
At 04:59 PM 5/22/97 -0400, Barbara Cohen wrote:
>However, I don't believe in sending out 100 letters at a time. I suggest to
>my trainees sending out 5 well-researched and personally addressed letters
>per week. That way if anyone hires you from the first batch, you haven't used
>up your list of possible clients to contact after that first assignment is
>done.
Barbara,
Interesting idea.
I for one do send out loads of letters at once, usually about 50 every 3-4
months (trying to tie some in with publishing cycles, too), and sometimes it
will be six months or more before I hear from anyone from a specific
mailing. I do not call after I send these packets out, as I found that the
usual response when I did was something like, "We'll call you if we have
something." BUT I do hear from some of them (rate of return being similar
to what Janet mentioned); I also keep sending my stuff to the some of the
same places (if I feel that I can't live without indexing some of their
books!) and that often works out for me, too. Janet was right; your
materials ARE kept on file. I also keep records of to whom I send my
marketing packets (date, names, subjects published, etc.). The cost of
sending these mass mailings is more than adequately covered by the 1-2 jobs
I get from each mailing. Best of all, I have gotten several clients for
whom I work on a repeat basis from doing this sort of marketing. Like
Barbara, I have a list of publishers for whom I want to work and the list is
like a bottomless pit. There are so many publishers doing interesting books!
You just have to get started with the mailings and let some time go by
because that is just how it works, for the most part. Someone asked if
patience is a virtue. I don't know if it is a virtue but it is necessary in
this business.
BTW, in August 1996, Margie Towery posted a marvelous list of things to do
while you are looking/waiting for work. Perhaps Margie could repost that?
(Hint.) There are many things to do as well as marketing during the time
that you are looking/waiting for work, things that will make you a more
competent professional when that phone call does come.
*****************************************
Cynthia D. Bertelsen--Indexer
cbertel@usit.net
Web page: http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html
*****************************************
=========================================================================
Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 21:55:52 LCL
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Victoria Baker <vbaker@MCN.ORG>
Subject: Re: Vocabulary control & xrefs
In-Reply-To: <199705230310.UAA27986@dns1.mcn.org>
>Quickly, I prefer the suggestion by Pam Rider
> Log phase
> adding, xxx
> phasing, xxx
> etc, xx
>rather than the parenthetical example.
I don't understand why, if the terms given are synonyms, which according to
the query in question they were, this is a good solution. It is a good
solution if they are separate concepts, but that was not the question.
Victoria
vbaker@mcn.org
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 07:38:24 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Rachel Rice <rachelr@TIAC.NET>
Subject: press releases
Hi Everyone,
Can anyone tell me what exactly Julia Child said about good indexes being so
essential to books? Thanks to the Marketing Roundtable I'm writing myself a
press release for our local paper's Business Highlights, and would like to
quote Julia but I want to get it right. I should have written it down right
away.
I'm also working on the web site for the MedSci SIG and I'm open to
suggestions.
Thanks in advance!
Rachel
-------------------------------------------------------
Rachel Rice
Directions Unlimited Desktop Services
Chilmark, Mass.
rachelr@tiac.net
http://www.tiac.net/users/rachelr/
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 08:18:26 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: MTOWERY@AOL.COM
Subject: ASI Heartland Meeting
ASI Heartland Chapter Meeting
June 7, 1 p.m. - 5 p.m.
Decatur Branch Library, 5301 Kentucky Ave. (southwest corner of Indianapolis)
This will be primarily a business meeting, but we'll also talk about doings
at the annual conference that some of us just attended. Business will include
plans for summer picnic, logo pin update, fall meeting plans, and policies
and procedures for our chapter. We hope to see you there, as we want
everyone's input!
Please bring finger foods to share and your own drinks. The Decatur library
(a branch of Indy-Marion County Library) is near the southwest corner of
Indy, just outside the beltway. From I-465, take exit 8 (Rt. 67/Kentucky
Ave.) and turn southwest. The library is a mile or so, next to a high school.
Questions? Contact Sandy Topping (sctopping@aol.com) or me.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 10:37:14 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Sanindex@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: reference lists
This query is specific to scholarly type books. How many of you on a regular
basis index the reference list authors? Sandi Schroeder
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 10:42:36 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: John Laughlin <Laughlin52@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Snoozers
How did you get started as an indexer? I would like to get into the buisness.
John
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 10:47:04 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: John Laughlin <Laughlin52@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: New Kid needs Info
I would like to get started in indexing. Any ideas how? Any good web sites
on the topic or possible work? John
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 10:47:42 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: MaryMort@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Disability insurance
Cynthia,
While Sandi is investigating the possibilities of group disability insurance,
you might want to check with a local insurance agent. I asked the agent who
handles my auto and homeowners insurance recently about disability insurance.
She gave me information about 2 companies (Provident and Washington
National) so there must be many more that sell policies to individuals. Our
occupation is one of the least risky so the premiums are not ridiculously
high. I haven't actually purchased a policy yet, but my understanding was
that I would be covered for loss of sight as well as loss of a hand or foot.
I need to get more details about coverage for long-term illnesses, but in
general the coverage was for inability to perform the tasks of my current
occupation (after a certain number of months of disability.)
Hope this helps,
Mary
--
* Mary Mortensen * marymort@aol.com
* Lawrence, Kansas, USA
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 11:32:58 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: JPerlman@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: New Indexers: Finding Work
All,
I think Barbara Cohen's comments regarding how she markets are extremely
interesting ... and a way of doing things that I hadn't thought of before. I
would think about this approach and perhaps go with it. You could blitz the
market with 100 letters at a time and be successful, and you could send out
fewer letters at a time and refine your letter as time goes by as Barbara
suggests too.
Barbara, thanks for sharing those ideas. I've learned something myself!
Excellent!
Janet Perlman
Southwest Indexing
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 11:49:58 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Sanindex@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Tabs, mylar tabs
There are actually two types of indexing. One, which most of us do, and the
mechanical insertion of tabs on the sides of pages etc. Actually if you
look into Literary Marketplace under indexing, you will find the mechanical
types of indexing. We fall under Editorial. Sandi Schroeder
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 11:00:03 -0500
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Carol Roberts <Carol.Roberts@MIXCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: New Indexers: Finding Work
In-Reply-To: <199705230429.XAA27105@mixcom.mixcom.com>
Might I add to Janet's wise advice? On the matter of meeting people and
networking, be sure to read the business section of your local newspaper
for networking opportunities.
Just a few days ago, I stumbled across a Milwaukee-based organization
called Wisconsin Venture Network. At their monthly luncheons, anyone who
wants to can go up to the mike and take two minutes to describe their
business and display marketing materials at the back table! All of these
two-minute pitches are then written up in the org's newsletter. So look for
meetings you can attend where you might run into folks in charge of
publications. *Always* bring business cards with you. (If anyone wants info
on Venture Network's next meeting, please e-mail me privately.)
In fact, I never go anywhere anymore without business cards. Even if you're
a brand new indexer, get a business card. Give 'em out like candy.
On the matter of bulk mailings, I fully agree with Janet, although I never
actually send out as many as 100 at a time. I tend to send out fewer than
50. I also tailor the cover letter for each publisher, looking carefully at
what they actually publish. In March I sent out 27 and within a week had a
new book from a new client. That's probably very unusual--don't be
discouraged if it takes months to hear anything. I certainly am not
discounting those other 26 publishers, some of whom may get around to
trying me out in a year's time. Or not. In the meantime, I won't be sitting
around waiting for the phone to ring. I'll be getting out to meetings.
Because I find it difficult to approach strangers, especially in
large-group settings, I set myself a modest goal of handing out just 1 or 2
business cards every time I go to a meeting.
Good luck, everybody. Try to be patient. It's worth it.
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: Fri, 23 May 1997 12:16:23 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Ann Norcross <norcross@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: To Debbie Stewart
Sorry to post this to the list, but e-mail keeps bouncing!
Deborah, please send me a note at norcross@ix.netcom.com. I cannot
seem to get any mail to you; the ABTS address bounces back every time,
and juno doesn't seem to be getting through, either.
Thanks,
Ann
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 14:16:03 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: TShere7566@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: New Indexers: Finding Work
Here's another new indexer's perspective on marketing letters. I think
Barbara Cohen's suggestion to send out "5 well-researched and personally
addressed letters per week" instead of bulk mailings of 100 exactly-the-same
letters makes perfect sense. Here's what I've done. I began sending out
marketing letters in March; I've only sent out 12 total. So far the result is
one good job (of exactly the sort I'm looking for) and one message from a
managing editor saying he'll look for a project for me in the near future.
The package I send out consists of a cover letter, my "resume", and two
complete sample indexes. I call the publisher to find out who the package
should go to. The cover letter demonstrates my familiarity with their current
publishing program --I research recent and forthcoming titles before writing.
I mention one or two specific titles I admire as well (truthfully of
course!). I recap, briefly, those elements of my resume which qualify me to
work on books of the sort they publish. I enclose sample indexes, preferably
two, in the topic area(s) I'm asking to work in. (I include a kind of
disclaimer which says that the samples are not published indexes because I'm
fairly new to indexing, and that they were prepared without length or style
guidelines, so other styles are of course possible depending on what the
client needs.) And I close by telling them I will telephone during a specific
week in the near future to see if they need other information. Then I do it
(usually I end up talking to their voice mail, saying I look forward to
hearing from them when they have a project I can help them with).
If I were an editor choosing a new freelancer from a pool of unknowns, I'd
pick someone whose work I had seen (hence the samples) and who showed they
knew what my publishing program was about. It's time-consuming to do the
research it takes to demonstrate this, but I think it's worth it. Preparing a
wide variety of sample indexes also takes lots of time--but I've learned so
much by doing it. Also, sending out a few letters at a time allows you to
make changes as you become aware of refinements you should add. For instance,
I've decided to say from now on that I am a *full time* freelance indexer
instead of just a freelance indexer, because I had one editor ask, implying
that he had found it frustrating to deal with part-timers because of their
limited availability. Instead of wishing I had told 100 potential customers
something slightly different, I just incorporate the change to my ongoing
marketing program.
I'd be interested in hearing more from new indexers who have succeeded in
getting work on the specifics of their marketing programs--let's offer some
more encouragement to those who have not yet had results.
--Therese Shere
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 14:27:41 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Barbara Stroup <indexa2z@THE-SPA.COM>
Subject: MEGO
Craig, that's hysterical. I know the syndrome. The Springfield Union just
ran an article on me, let's trade copies!
Barbara
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 15:02:17 EDT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Suellen Kasoff <lserve@JUNO.COM>
Subject: Re: New Indexers: Finding Work
Cynthia: Just my two cents, but I thought it was a wonderful idea,
sending out five letters a week for 20 weeks. I think this would work for
anyone who's job hunting, not just indexers.
On Fri, 23 May 1997 06:45:02 -0400 Cynthia Bertelsen <cbertel@USIT.NET>
writes:
>At 04:59 PM 5/22/97 -0400, Barbara Cohen wrote:
>
>>However, I don't believe in sending out 100 letters at a time. I
>suggest to
>>my trainees sending out 5 well-researched and personally addressed
>letters
>>per week. That way if anyone hires you from the first batch, you
>haven't used
>>up your list of possible clients to contact after that first
>assignment is
>>done.
>
>Barbara,
>
>Interesting idea.
>
>I for one do send out loads of letters at once, usually about 50 every
>3-4
>months (trying to tie some in with publishing cycles, too), and
>sometimes it
>will be six months or more before I hear from anyone from a specific
>mailing. I do not call after I send these packets out, as I found that
>the
>usual response when I did was something like, "We'll call you if we
>have
>something." BUT I do hear from some of them (rate of return being
>similar
>to what Janet mentioned); I also keep sending my stuff to the some of
>the
>same places (if I feel that I can't live without indexing some of
>their
>books!) and that often works out for me, too. Janet was right; your
>materials ARE kept on file. I also keep records of to whom I send my
>marketing packets (date, names, subjects published, etc.). The cost of
>sending these mass mailings is more than adequately covered by the 1-2
>jobs
>I get from each mailing. Best of all, I have gotten several clients
>for
>whom I work on a repeat basis from doing this sort of marketing. Like
>Barbara, I have a list of publishers for whom I want to work and the
>list is
>like a bottomless pit. There are so many publishers doing interesting
>books!
>
>You just have to get started with the mailings and let some time go by
>because that is just how it works, for the most part. Someone asked
>if
>patience is a virtue. I don't know if it is a virtue but it is
>necessary in
>this business.
>
>BTW, in August 1996, Margie Towery posted a marvelous list of things
>to do
>while you are looking/waiting for work. Perhaps Margie could repost
>that?
>(Hint.) There are many things to do as well as marketing during the
>time
>that you are looking/waiting for work, things that will make you a
>more
>competent professional when that phone call does come.
>
>
>
>*****************************************
>
>Cynthia D. Bertelsen--Indexer
>cbertel@usit.net
>Web page: http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html
>
>*****************************************
>
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 15:22:14 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Sarah H Lemaire <shl@WORLD.STD.COM>
Subject: Responding to e-mail
In-Reply-To: <199705101411.AA29078@world.std.com>
Group -
I got an interesting e-mail yesterday from someone at MercuryCT1@aol.com.
This person (Adrian) says his business is Mercury Print Productions and he
got my name and e-mail address from the Freelance Editorial Association.
I'm not desperate for work (in fact, I'm tied up until late June) and I'm
a bit wary about responding to this request but on the other hand, my home
address and phone number are in the FLEA book so sending my resume
probably doesn't hurt. He's in the 860 area code but I haven't called the
number yet to see who answers.
Since he's not from an established publisher or corporation, I asked for
the names of other freelancers who've worked for him. Does this seem
reasonable?
I'm kind of inclined to steer clear but I'd hate to blow off a legitimate
job oppotunity either.
Any advice?
Sarah Lemaire
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 12:31:11 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Roberta Horowitz <roberta@NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Responding to e-mail
In-Reply-To: <199705231923.MAA03849@mail5.netcom.com>
I would be very careful. On one of those news shows (Dateline I think)
there was an episode about someone answering an ad posted on a usenet
and ran into major problems. This might not be the same as the information
came from the association but a call to the Better Business Bureau or some
publisher organization might be helpful.
Roberta Horowitz
On Fri, 23 May 1997, Sarah H Lemaire wrote:
> Group -
>
> I got an interesting e-mail yesterday from someone at MercuryCT1@aol.com.
> This person (Adrian) says his business is Mercury Print Productions and he
> got my name and e-mail address from the Freelance Editorial Association.
> I'm not desperate for work (in fact, I'm tied up until late June) and I'm
> a bit wary about responding to this request but on the other hand, my home
> address and phone number are in the FLEA book so sending my resume
> probably doesn't hurt. He's in the 860 area code but I haven't called the
> number yet to see who answers.
>
> Since he's not from an established publisher or corporation, I asked for
> the names of other freelancers who've worked for him. Does this seem
> reasonable?
>
> I'm kind of inclined to steer clear but I'd hate to blow off a legitimate
> job oppotunity either.
>
> Any advice?
>
> Sarah Lemaire
>
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 15:43:04 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Seth A. Maislin" <seth@ORA.COM>
Subject: Re: Responding to e-mail
In-Reply-To: Sarah H Lemaire <shl@world.std.com> "Responding to e-mail" (May
23, 3:22pm)
Sarah,
You are right in wanting to know more about Adrian at MercuryCT1@aol.com.
I heard from him too. So I wrote back to him asking him who he was, without
volunteering any information. I even turned off my message signature.
He explained that is from Mercury Print Productions in Connecticut,
and that MPP is a print provider. He is marketing his company (not offering
a contract). His goal in writing you (and me, and others) is to sell to
the people who might use printers: the production people.
I replied to him, told him my services (and that I don't use printers
often, if at all), and asked him for more detailed information about
MPP.
I think in general we should always be wary of unsolicited email, just
as we are when somebody we don't recognize calls us on the telephone.
- Seth
> I got an interesting e-mail yesterday from someone at MercuryCT1@aol.com.
> This person (Adrian) says his business is Mercury Print Productions and he
> got my name and e-mail address from the Freelance Editorial Association.
> I'm not desperate for work (in fact, I'm tied up until late June) and I'm
> a bit wary about responding to this request but on the other hand, my home
> address and phone number are in the FLEA book so sending my resume
> probably doesn't hurt. He's in the 860 area code but I haven't called the
> number yet to see who answers.
> Since he's not from an established publisher or corporation, I asked for
> the names of other freelancers who've worked for him. Does this seem
> reasonable?
> I'm kind of inclined to steer clear but I'd hate to blow off a legitimate
> job oppotunity either.
--
Seth A. Maislin (seth@ora.com)
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.ora.com/people/staff/seth
Webmaster, Amer Soc of Indexers: http://www.well.com/user/asi
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 16:29:39 -0400
Reply-To: CKelso@worldnet.att.net
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: CKelso <CKelso@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: New Indexers: Finding Work
Hi All:
After reading all the "finding work" postings, I wonder if anyone can
post a sample letter that an Indexer would send to a potential client.
What about the "newbies" who haven't much experience?
I'm considering Indexing - not yet in practice. I'm learning a lot from
all the INDEX-L postings. You're a great group!
CKelso
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 16:35:17 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Marilyn Rowland <MarRowland@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Responding to e-mail
In a message dated 97-05-23 16:05:38 EDT, Seth writes:
<< I think in general we should always be wary of unsolicited email, just
as we are when somebody we don't recognize calls us on the telephone.
>>
Good advice! For those who may be interested, this is MercuryCT1@aol.com's
profile on AOL.
Marilyn Rowland
Member Name: Adrian Mercury Print Productions
Location: Old Saybrook, CT, but spend a lot of time in NY, and NJ.
Birthdate: 06/07
Sex: Male
Marital Status: Single and looking !!!
Hobbies: All water sports, skiing (water/snow), fishing, mountain biking,
rollerblading, weight lifting, photography, travel, many more !
Computers: IBM & Power Mac
Occupation: Printing Account Executive
Personal Quote: Live every day to the fullest, because every day is another
opportunity to succeed !
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 16:40:41 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Marilyn Rowland <MarRowland@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: press releases
Rachel,
I can't recall exactly what Julia Child said at the conference, but in her
Introduction to _The Way To Cook_ (NY: Alfred A. Knopf, 1995), she writes:
"A reference or teaching book is only as good as its index. This one--by far
the most intelligent in any of my books--was prepared by Pat Kelly, one of
the founders of The Culinary Historians of Boston."
Marilyn Rowland
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 15:47:41 -0500
Reply-To: davidaus@indiana.edu
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: david robert austen <davidaus@INDIANA.EDU>
Subject: Re: Disability insurance: where else to shop for it.
As for me, I get my insurance through the National Associate of the Self
Empoloyed. 800 232 NASE. I have no connection, except my membership,
which qualifies me to by major medical insurance there.
MaryMort@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> Cynthia,
> While Sandi is investigating the possibilities of group disability insurance,
> you might want to check with a local insurance agent. I asked the agent who
> handles my auto and homeowners insurance recently about disability insurance.
> She gave me information about 2 companies (Provident and Washington
> National) so there must be many more that sell policies to individuals. Our
> occupation is one of the least risky so the premiums are not ridiculously
> high. I haven't actually purchased a policy yet, but my understanding was
> that I would be covered for loss of sight as well as loss of a hand or foot.
> I need to get more details about coverage for long-term illnesses, but in
> general the coverage was for inability to perform the tasks of my current
> occupation (after a certain number of months of disability.)
>
> Hope this helps,
> Mary
> --
> * Mary Mortensen * marymort@aol.com
> * Lawrence, Kansas, USA
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 17:20:31 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Barbara Cohen <BECohen653@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Disability insurance
I have my disability insurance through Provident (one of the ones mentioned
by Mary M.), and I think it is reasonably priced for what I would get if I
needed to use it. (Covers basic living expenses should I be incapacitated
from indexing for more than 2 months.)
I went to a workshop years ago in which we were told the following statistics
for a woman, aged 40:
1 in 70 chance of claim for car insurance
1 in 105 chance of claim for life insurance
1 in 88 chance of claim for homeowners insurance
1 in 8 chance of claim for health and disability insurance
I decided to get disability insurance shortly thereafter.
Barbara
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 18:18:31 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Ann Norcross <norcross@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Responding to e-mail
Marilyn Rowland wrote:
>
> In a message dated 97-05-23 16:05:38 EDT, Seth writes:
>
> << I think in general we should always be wary of unsolicited email, just
> as we are when somebody we don't recognize calls us on the telephone.
> >>
>
> Good advice! For those who may be interested, this is MercuryCT1@aol.com's
> profile on AOL.
>
> Marilyn Rowland
>
> Member Name: Adrian Mercury Print Productions
> Location: Old Saybrook, CT, but spend a lot of time in NY, and NJ.
> Birthdate: 06/07
> Sex: Male
> Marital Status: Single and looking !!!
> Hobbies: All water sports, skiing (water/snow), fishing, mountain
biking,
> rollerblading, weight lifting, photography, travel, many more !
> Computers: IBM & Power Mac
> Occupation: Printing Account Executive
> Personal Quote: Live every day to the fullest, because every day is another
> opportunity to succeed !
Born in in June of 1907??!! Pretty darn active for a 90-year-old guy.
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 19:41:10 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Jeanna Flaherty <Indeks@AOL.COM>
Subject: Finding Work-New Indexers
I find the posts about new indexers and finding work interesting and helpful,
especially Therese Shere, who had a great approach. I'm curious---does
anyone know exactly how many working free-lance indexers there are, compared
to the number of books published each year? I thought I read that ASI had a
membership of 950 (??) I've always been impressed by the helpfulness and
graciousness of veteran indexers helping out new folks--unlike some
professions that actively try to keep newcomers out to have more business for
the ones already in! I also wonder if the boom in companies that push
home-based businesses has more people than before considering indexing.
Jeanna Flaherty
Jeanna Flaherty I N D E X I N G
=========================================================================
Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 20:57:33 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Peg Mauer <Pmauer@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: New Kid needs Info
In a message dated 97-05-23 14:54:31 EDT, you write:
> I would like to get started in indexing. Any ideas how? Any good web sites
> on the topic or possible work?
John,
Check out the American Society of Indexer's (ASI) web site at:
http://www.well.com/user/asi/
There's a Frequently Asked Questions section that's very good, how to get
started, courses, resources, meetings, conferences, seminars, marketing
ideas, etc. Good luck!
Peg Mauer
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 03:00:47 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: GVHatch@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Finding Work-New Indexers
In a message dated 97-05-23 21:19:47 EDT, you write:
<< I'm curious---does
anyone know exactly how many working free-lance indexers there are, compared
to the number of books published each year? I thought I read that ASI had a
membership of 950 (??) >>
Actually, membership now is around 1400. I have no idea how many books are
published per year, but when you take into account large presses, small
presses, authors publishing their own books etc. there seems to be work
enough to go around.
Yes, the people in the indexing profession are generous with advice and
genuinely nice people to be around. I think most indexers are more concerned
with making sure that quality indexes are being produced than trying to
sabotage the competition.
If you haven't already, you should get involved with the local chapter or
group closest to you. That is a wonderful way to develop friendships and
find people to offer advice.
Gaylene
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 07:26:27 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Kari Bero <bero@CYBERSPACE.COM>
Subject: Number of indexers (was: Finding Work-New Indexers)
In-Reply-To: <970524030047_-1565549010@emout14.mail.aol.com>
On Sat, 24 May 1997 GVHatch@aol.com wrote:
> Actually, membership now is around 1400. I have no idea how many books are
> published per year, but when you take into account large presses, small
> presses, authors publishing their own books etc. there seems to be work
> enough to go around.
And then you have to think of all the indexers who are not ASI members.
Here, in Seattle, I know quite a few. (And I'm just one little person in
this enormous city.) My guess is that there are at least half as many
indexers in the United States who are _not_ ASI members, as are. So, if
membership is 1400, I'd roughly estimate (keywords: roughly estimate) that
there are at least another 700 that are not. And, that is just the U.S.
Then, there are folks who write indexes, but who don't know that they are
"indexing" or that there are professional indexers - folks who do an index
for a friend or colleague now & then. It's funny how many people I meet
say they've done that before. I bet there are lots of people in that
situation. If they knew that there is an entire professional community of
indexers, they just might flip. (some have)
As for publishers, sure there are small presses & authors publishing their
own texts, not to mention the flurry of desktop publishing services.....
But, how many of those actually contract with indexers? Do they generate
concordances using their word processors? Do they ask authors to create
their own? Do they even remember to include an index? I'd love to figure
out how to spread the word that a good index is worth XYZ to such a
company. Wish there was a way...
But I digress. Even given my above estimations, there is _plenty_ of work
to go around. (Wouldn't it be neat if we could see how many titles in
_Books In Print_ do not have indexes? Even so, that is just U.S.
publishing.) That is what I think helps indexers be so comfortable with
their skills. We all have a niche. Maybe not a specialization, but a
niche. Most of the indexers I've met are good at figuring out what makes
them stand apart from the rest & at finding out how to market that. I've
been thrilled, too, to meet so many professionals who freely give advice &
support. In many (most?) other professions, people get so busy being
one-up on everyone else and they seem to feel so threatened by new members
of the profession. Indexers are different. We're definitely a rare
breed. 8-)
-Kari
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Kari J. Bero
Bero-West Indexing Services 206-937-3673
3722 Beach Drive SW, Suite 101 bero@cyberspace.com
Seattle, WA 98116 http://www.cyberspace.com/~bero/
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 11:07:15 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Susan Healy <welshone@FREENET.TLH.FL.US>
Subject: Re: Number of indexers (was: Finding Work-New Indexers)
In-Reply-To: <199705251435.KAA04230@fn4.freenet.tlh.fl.us>
Here at the Florida Legislature's Division of Statutory Revision, the
indexing unit holds a single membership to ASI rather than individual
memberships. At one time we were six; now we are four.
Sue Healy
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 11:44:02 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Cynthia Bertelsen <cbertel@USIT.NET>
Subject: New book on names
Just wanted to share this with those who find foreign names to be a problem
at times in indexing:
Ingraham, Holly. People's Names: A Cross-Cultural Reference Guide to the
Proper Use of Over 40,000 Personal and Familial Names in Over 100 Cultures.
Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, Inc., 1997. ISBN 00786401877.
There is a wealth of information about name order, types of names, titles,
familial relationships found in naming, day of the week inserted into names
, etc. Also included are naming practices in certain historical periods.
While the book is not 100% comprehensive because of its size (613 pages), it
is a great resource for little known facts about naming practices in many
cultures. These facts would be time-consuming to track down otherwise.
There is a selective bibliography.
*****************************************
Cynthia D. Bertelsen--Indexer
cbertel@usit.net
Web page: http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html
*****************************************
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 12:02:33 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: DStaub11@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: reference lists
Sandi wrote:
>This query is specific to scholarly type books. How many of you on a regular
>basis index the reference list authors?
In scholarly books, I index: all authors referenced in the text; authors
^cited^ in foot- or endnotes (not authors listed as bibliographic
references); and NOT the reference list itself. (I use it for looking up
first names if necessary.) All of these choices, of course, are subject to
the publisher's preferences; I have one scholarly publisher that does not
have me index authors cited in the text unless their views are extensively
discussed.
An important thing to remember about scholarly books is that research is
(almost) always based on other people's research, and therefore knowing who
was cited is very important to the book's audience. There's a whole
interwoven web of citations in each field.
On the other hand, I think that it's the job of the bibliography to ^list^
all of the works cited. The job of the index is to refer the reader to actual
textual material related to a citation. When an author recently wanted me to
index all of the (many, many) bibliographic citations in the notes (like
this: 2. For more information about this subject, read...[15 books].), and
I discovered that the book did not ^have^ a reference list, I told her that I
didn't think it was good indexing practice, but that I was happy to do it,
for an extra amount per page--since she was basically asking me to create the
bibliography in the index.
There, you have my opinion!
Do Mi Stauber
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 10:18:48 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "P. Buell" <pbuell@U.WASHINGTON.EDU>
Subject: Re: reference lists
In-Reply-To: <199705241602.JAA08448@mx4.u.washington.edu>
On authors cited in the text, footnotes etc. but not pure references: In
my most recent index I have an set of entries under Authorities. Authors
and others listed either have their views discussed extensively in the
book or were the producers of letters of personal communications cited.
Since the work is a translation with a book length introduction, I also
list editors of the text (Chinese), etc. In another index, of an
anthropological text, I indexed all those cited in the text proper since
the book in question was in many ways a guide to the literature on the
topic. Note that here I am probably following European indexing methods.
The germans often have a separate list for such authorities, foreign
words, books, etc.
A technical question: what is the best way to index an Arabic work? I have
been listing them under the first real word after the article or
introductory particle. And should there be a see when, for example, a work
is cited without the article or particle? This is what I have done (for a
multi-author work with one index) but am not sure the see was necessary,
after all, if you have the language one would logically look in both
places. Paul D. Buell
PS: I am another Seattle indexer who is not an ASI member, but I plan to
fix that soon since, unlike the ATA (I do translation too), the ASI does
not seem to be comprised of an elite of self-appointed "haves" that is
trying to cut the competition whatever the cost...
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 20:54:37 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Sharon Hughes <SHughes512@AOL.COM>
Subject: database help requested
Hi,
I know there are a number of database professionals out there and I wonder
if you can help me out. I've been given an assignment because I'm an
'orderly thinker' and because I can spend hours researching facts and
figures. Well, the result is that I've been asked to document a database
that has been growing for two years and where no data dictionaries or file
linkages have been written down. They are all in the heads of two brilliant
people who seem to dislike (or simply haven't had the time needed)
documentation.
On Friday, the 'powers' told me that I would be given two days per week to
pull together the documentation. AND that it would be a terrific way for me
to learn the database!! I'm sure it will but where should I start. Could
anyone fax me a few pages of a data dictionary format that works? I thought
I could put it together as an Access database itself. Then I could build a
report that would show all the links and which tables were filled in from the
which data entry screens. Is this crazy? I haven't done anything like this
before. The database seems to have around 100 tables and 20-30 data entry
screens. I just flipped through the screens last week for the first time.
There are lots of fields named things like userfield 1 and userfield 2 but
no one has actually written down what the customary entries are, if tables
are used to provide entry, and what reports the fields are appearing in.
etc etc.
Please write to me off INDEX-L because this isn't quite an indexing
problem.
Thanks - for 'listening'.
Sharon
=========================================================================
Date: Sat, 24 May 1997 06:11:25 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Willa MacAllen <macallen@TIAC.NET>
Organization: MacAllen's Information Service
Subject: Re: database help requested
Hi Sharon:
I was interested in your post, since I'm also using Microsoft Access for
3 different database projects. However, none of the databases I'll be
working with have that many tables. Can you let me know how the project
goes. It sounds huge.
Willa MacAllen
MacAllen's Information Services
Librarian/Technical Writer
Boston
macallen@tiac.net
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 08:50:25 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: FRED BROWN <fredb@CYBERUS.CA>
Subject: database help requested
If you're looking for an "indexing angle" to your database problem you =
might consider building your data dictionary initially in a dedicated =
indexing package (e.g. MACREX or CINDEX).
You would assign a reference locator (i.e. page number) to each table. =
Next, you would assign meaningful names to each table and field. Then =
you would then index each table with as a main entry with the fields as =
sub-entries. You would also post each field as a main entry. You could =
also enter the original table and field names and make "See" =
cross-references to your more meaningful names. As you find connections =
between fields in different tables you would make "See Also" =
cross-references.
To print the information by table, all you have to do is put the index =
in page number order
By the end this indexing process you would likely have a pretty good =
handle on the contents and structure of your database.
Good luck!
Fred Brown
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Fred Brown
McCrae Consulting Associates
"Technical Communication"
fredb@cyberus.ca
Phone: 613-728-5761 Fax: 613-728-9373
31 Grange Ave., Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1Y 0N8
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 12:02:11 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Maro Riofrancos <riofrancos@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: Ethical dilemma
I was considering trying to get work from a major publisher of computer
books. Out of curiosity, I took a look at a couple of indexes to their
books.
I was stunned by what I found. One of the indexes was easily one of the
worst indexes I have ever come across in my 25 years as an indexer, the
other was just very bad.
The kinds of mistakes I found covered the entire range of possibilities:
1. missing page references.
2. important topics covered extensively in the text entirely missing from
the index.
3. exactly synonymous terms indexed separately with no cross-references
between the synonyms, so that each of the synonyms ended up with different
page numbers.
4. double posting with nonmatching sets of page numbers.
5. indexing of terms mentioned only in passing, with no attendant
discussion.
6. obvious ignorance of the meaning of basic terms of art.
7. misalphabetization and inconsistent alphabetization.
8. In addition to the above, the indexes were replete with typos and cop
yediting mistakes.
I could give specific examples ad nauseam of all the types of mistakes (I
stopped counting when I got to a hundred).
These are the elements of my dilemma:
1. Do I simply forget about working for this company, since it clearly
manifests such an indifference to quality?
2. Do I send my resume in but make no reference to the quality issues?
3. Do I send my resume in and call the publisher's attention to these
mistakes?
4. Do I write a private letter to the indexer (whose name is given in the
book)?
5. Do I have an obligation to readers in general?
6. Which is the higher duty: to say nothing bad about colleagues or to
improve the quality of indexes?
In the horns,
Maro Riofrancos
Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
290 Riverside Drive, 9A
New York, NY 10025
Voice: 212.864.2121
Fax: 212.222.2921
Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 12:12:34 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: DStaub11@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: page numbering--heads and subheads
A while ago, Nancy wrote:
>
>With all due respect to Fred's pronouncement that duplicate page numbers
>are ok, I know that I learned from some expert source they weren't. I went
>back to the notes I took years ago and found the source to be G.Norman
>Knight's Indexing, The Art of. Knight gives an example:
> coloring, 29-40
> with wax, 52
>and says there should be no subheadings about coloring on pages 29-40. He
>says not to use a subheading if it can be a heading (unless you are making
>a cross-reference to a heading). Now, I don't have the book, so if anyone
>does, or has seen this idea, can they explain Knight's reasoning? And why
>don't most indexers today follow it?
>
I'd like to address this, because I keep finding myself discussing it. I
don't know Knight, though! I know there are different opinions (and in fact
have heard of different publishers requring opposite approaches). Anyway,
here's mine.
When I find a long page span about one subject, I feel that the reader
deserves to know about the existence of a long discussion. As a reader myself
I often go looking amid many locators for the Main Discussion of the topic.
An example: I was looking in my Wordperfect book for information about search
and replace. It turned up in lots of different places in the book; there were
lots of different subheads under it in the index. But I knew that the
information I wanted was in the basic section where they tell you all about
search and replace. And I had a hard time finding that section because the
indexer had broken up the information into little bits.
I've heard people argue that if the long span is a whole chapter, you
shouldn't put it in because it can be found in the table of contents. I don't
agree; I think that the index and the table of contents are two different
tools, used at different times. When I was looking for the chapter on search
and replace I wanted to find it in the index, not have to look in two places.
Another example: in the jazz history book I just indexed, there was a chapter
on jam sessions and their importance in the development of bebop. Jam
sessions, of course, turned up in a great many other places in the book. If I
was a reader looking for information on jam sessions, I would want to know
that there was a whole long discussion on it. And furthermore, this being a
scholarly book, the chapter was called "The Jazzmen's True Academy." Not
much help from the TOC!
So we have a long span after the general topic, thereby notifying the reader
of its existence. It's still not fair to make them look all the way through
it if they don't want to. So the section ^also^ needs to be broken down into
subheads. And there you have it: duplicate page numbers in the general
section and in subheads.
On the other hand, if you have a heading that looks like this:
Jam sessions, 42, 43, 50
after-hours, 40-45
I would delete 42 and 43 after the main heading! Those are not useful.
Okay, let the debate begin!
Do Mi
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 12:32:15 -0400
Reply-To: vmchenry@ix.netcom.com
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Virginia G. McHenry" <vmchenry@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Organization: Exceptional Results, Inc.
Subject: Re: Ethical dilemma
Mario,
My son, the soon to be graduate of psychology, recently gave me some
excellent advice I will pass on - "What is your goal?":-} The answer to
that question frequently answers ethical dilemmas for me. Ginny McHenry
Maro Riofrancos wrote:
>
> I was considering trying to get work from a major publisher of computer
> books. Out of curiosity, I took a look at a couple of indexes to their
> books.
>
> I was stunned by what I found. One of the indexes was easily one of the
> worst indexes I have ever come across in my 25 years as an indexer, the
> other was just very bad.
>
> The kinds of mistakes I found covered the entire range of possibilities:
>
> 1. missing page references.
> 2. important topics covered extensively in the text entirely missing from
> the index.
> 3. exactly synonymous terms indexed separately with no cross-references
> between the synonyms, so that each of the synonyms ended up with different
> page numbers.
> 4. double posting with nonmatching sets of page numbers.
> 5. indexing of terms mentioned only in passing, with no attendant
> discussion.
> 6. obvious ignorance of the meaning of basic terms of art.
> 7. misalphabetization and inconsistent alphabetization.
> 8. In addition to the above, the indexes were replete with typos and cop
> yediting mistakes.
>
> I could give specific examples ad nauseam of all the types of mistakes (I
> stopped counting when I got to a hundred).
>
> These are the elements of my dilemma:
>
> 1. Do I simply forget about working for this company, since it clearly
> manifests such an indifference to quality?
> 2. Do I send my resume in but make no reference to the quality issues?
> 3. Do I send my resume in and call the publisher's attention to these
> mistakes?
> 4. Do I write a private letter to the indexer (whose name is given in the
> book)?
> 5. Do I have an obligation to readers in general?
> 6. Which is the higher duty: to say nothing bad about colleagues or to
> improve the quality of indexes?
>
> In the horns,
>
> Maro Riofrancos
> Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
> 290 Riverside Drive, 9A
> New York, NY 10025
> Voice: 212.864.2121
> Fax: 212.222.2921
> Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 12:54:16 -0400
Reply-To: vmchenry@ix.netcom.com
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Virginia G. McHenry" <vmchenry@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Organization: Exceptional Results, Inc.
Subject: Re: page numbering--heads and subheads
Curious, I pulled out my Art of Indexing and found it was authored by
Larry Bonura. Skimming through I found no mention that duplicate page
numbers were or were not allowed so I looked at the index of the book
itself. I found:
testing indexes 22, 24, 135-142
for accuracy 136
for answer-the-question indexing 35
for concisesness 138
Just my two cents! :-] Ginny McHenry
DStaub11@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> A while ago, Nancy wrote:
> >
> >With all due respect to Fred's pronouncement that duplicate page numbers
> >are ok, I know that I learned from some expert source they weren't. I went
> >back to the notes I took years ago and found the source to be G.Norman
> >Knight's Indexing, The Art of. Knight gives an example:
> > coloring, 29-40
> > with wax, 52
> >and says there should be no subheadings about coloring on pages 29-40. He
> >says not to use a subheading if it can be a heading (unless you are making
> >a cross-reference to a heading). Now, I don't have the book, so if anyone
> >does, or has seen this idea, can they explain Knight's reasoning? And why
> >don't most indexers today follow it?
> >
> I'd like to address this, because I keep finding myself discussing it. I
> don't know Knight, though! I know there are different opinions (and in fact
> have heard of different publishers requring opposite approaches). Anyway,
> here's mine.
>
> When I find a long page span about one subject, I feel that the reader
> deserves to know about the existence of a long discussion. As a reader myself
> I often go looking amid many locators for the Main Discussion of the topic.
> An example: I was looking in my Wordperfect book for information about search
> and replace. It turned up in lots of different places in the book; there were
> lots of different subheads under it in the index. But I knew that the
> information I wanted was in the basic section where they tell you all about
> search and replace. And I had a hard time finding that section because the
> indexer had broken up the information into little bits.
>
> I've heard people argue that if the long span is a whole chapter, you
> shouldn't put it in because it can be found in the table of contents. I don't
> agree; I think that the index and the table of contents are two different
> tools, used at different times. When I was looking for the chapter on search
> and replace I wanted to find it in the index, not have to look in two places.
> Another example: in the jazz history book I just indexed, there was a chapter
> on jam sessions and their importance in the development of bebop. Jam
> sessions, of course, turned up in a great many other places in the book. If I
> was a reader looking for information on jam sessions, I would want to know
> that there was a whole long discussion on it. And furthermore, this being a
> scholarly book, the chapter was called "The Jazzmen's True Academy." Not
> much help from the TOC!
>
> So we have a long span after the general topic, thereby notifying the reader
> of its existence. It's still not fair to make them look all the way through
> it if they don't want to. So the section ^also^ needs to be broken down into
> subheads. And there you have it: duplicate page numbers in the general
> section and in subheads.
>
> On the other hand, if you have a heading that looks like this:
>
> Jam sessions, 42, 43, 50
> after-hours, 40-45
>
> I would delete 42 and 43 after the main heading! Those are not useful.
>
> Okay, let the debate begin!
>
> Do Mi
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 13:11:08 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Ann Norcross <norcross@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Ethical dilemma
Maro Riofrancos wrote:
> I was considering trying to get work from a major publisher of computer
> books. Out of curiosity, I took a look at a couple of indexes to their
> books.
>
> I was stunned by what I found. One of the indexes was easily one of the
> worst indexes I have ever come across in my 25 years as an indexer, the
> other was just very bad.
>
> The kinds of mistakes I found covered the entire range of possibilities:
------8<---------
<snip list of indexing errors>
> These are the elements of my dilemma:
And here are my thoughts, for whatever they're worth.
> 1. Do I simply forget about working for this company, since it clearly
> manifests such an indifference to quality?
Depends on how badly you need the money. Seriously, this is not meant
as a snide remark. I have a friend who is a highly-trained graphics
artist. She is doing a lot of book covers for computer books and other
short-lived publications; she calls herself a graphics prostitute.
Sometimes I feel like an indexing slut, myself, but... my mortgage and
health insurance are always paid (and usually on time :-).
Be aware that a poor index is often contributed to by the time
constraints imposed by a publisher, or by publishers editing finished
indexes without indexer help. If this would upset you, do not work for
that publisher.
If you have the income and the freedom to pick and choose clients, by
all means do so. There are some books I would not index--because of
subject matter--no matter how badly I needed the money; as I've said
here before, I do temp office work when I have to, rather than having no
work at all.
> 2. Do I send my resume in but make no reference to the quality issues?
Yes.
It is certainly appropriate, and desirable, to talk about your
familiarity with the content of their publications. Let them know you
are interested in what *they* are producing, and tell them what you can
contribute (not what others are failing to contribute). Keep the focus
on yourself and your skills and services.
> 3. Do I send my resume in and call the publisher's attention to these
> mistakes?
No.
> 4. Do I write a private letter to the indexer (whose name is given in the
> book)?
If it is my name in the book, then yes, I definitely want to hear from
you--but not on the list, please.
I do a lot of work for... let's see, what phrase did you use... ah yes,
"a major publisher of computer books. In fact, this weekend I am
indexing an 800-page book for them (note: I don't know which publisher
Maro is talking about). That's right, this *weekend*. I received the
entire manuscript on Thursday, at 7:30 pm, and I have to deliver the
index at 8:00 am Tuesday morning. Will there be errors in this index?
Probably. Errors of omission and depth, mainly. My main goals for this
index are: all page locaters correct; no spelling errors; all 1st, 2nd,
and 3rd level headings in the book appear in the index under an
appropriate keyword. That's about it. Fortunately, it is a very
well-written and well-organized book with lots of nice task-oriented
headings.
I'm doing as many dialog boxes, windows, menus, and buttons as I can,
but I can guarantee you that they are not all going to appear in the
index. I'm concentrating on tasks rather than on names of things, and
I'm using a lot of See and See also references rather than combining
topics under a single index entry; I have some page ranges that span
more than 5 or 6 pages... not something I usually like to do. I have
subcontracted out 2 dense chapters (Hi, Dick!), and am doing the rest
myself.
This book will have a shelf life (as estimated by the publisher) of
approximately 6 months. It is being sold in stores and given away with
product purchase in some cases. It is being advertised on the
Internet. The audience is both new and experienced users. Am I thrilled
that my name will be on the credits page? I don't mind. Will people be
able to find things like "e-mail address, finding" and "passwords" and
"printing" and "saving" and "home pages" and "Java" and "chat" in my
index? Yup. Will they find "ALIGN attribute, EMBED tag" in this
index? Nope. But they will find "HTML tags" and "EMBED tag" and "Web
pages, creating."
What the heck is my point? I'm a good indexer. I work hard, and I
don't like to make mistakes and produce poor indexes. I also like to
pay my bills, and so I take on projects like this one. If you looked at
the index for this book, and based on this index, decided that you
needed to call my client and tell them how bad a job I'm doing for them,
hindering repeat sales, causing difficulties for their readers, etc.,
etc., I might be out of work. On the other hand (and perhaps of more
interest to you), my client knows how hard I work for them. They
appreciate this rush job (appreciate it with words and with bonus
money); they might just tell you to take a hike, and then you would be
out of work. As I said before, keep the focus on YOU and what YOU can
do for the client.
> 5. Do I have an obligation to readers in general?
Yes. Your obligation is to the readers of the books YOU are indexing; do
a good job within whatever constraints you are presented with. Telling
one publisher about one or two bad indexes will not serve all that many
"readers in general." You can't fix the past; start from where you are
now, and do what you can.
> 6. Which is the higher duty: to say nothing bad about colleagues or to
> improve the quality of indexes?
Are they mutually exclusive? Are these the only two choices? I don't
really see it that way. You don't have to trash a colleague in order to
do good indexing. And seeking to make the world safe for "readers in
general" by getting another indexer fired (or not rehired, which amounts
to the same thing) doesn't feel like good karma to me.
Ann Norcross (Finishing data entry today; starting final edit tonight;
will edit all day Monday, then sleep! And thanks, Dick!)
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 13:40:16 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Maro Riofrancos <riofrancos@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: Ethical dilemma
That begs the question. The reason it's a dilemma is that there are several
incompatible options, and I'm not sure what my priorities are or ought to
be.
Maro Riofrancos
Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
290 Riverside Drive, 9A
New York, NY 10025
Voice: 212.864.2121
Fax: 212.222.2921
Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Virginia G. McHenry [SMTP:vmchenry@IX.NETCOM.COM]
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 1997 12:32 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list INDEX-L
Subject: Re: Ethical dilemma
Mario,
My son, the soon to be graduate of psychology, recently gave me some
excellent advice I will pass on - "What is your goal?":-} The answer to
that question frequently answers ethical dilemmas for me. Ginny McHenry
Maro Riofrancos wrote:
>
> I was considering trying to get work from a major publisher of computer
> books. Out of curiosity, I took a look at a couple of indexes to their
> books.
>
> I was stunned by what I found. One of the indexes was easily one of the
> worst indexes I have ever come across in my 25 years as an indexer, the
> other was just very bad.
>
> The kinds of mistakes I found covered the entire range of possibilities:
>
> 1. missing page references.
> 2. important topics covered extensively in the text entirely missing from
> the index.
> 3. exactly synonymous terms indexed separately with no cross-references
> between the synonyms, so that each of the synonyms ended up with
different
> page numbers.
> 4. double posting with nonmatching sets of page numbers.
> 5. indexing of terms mentioned only in passing, with no attendant
> discussion.
> 6. obvious ignorance of the meaning of basic terms of art.
> 7. misalphabetization and inconsistent alphabetization.
> 8. In addition to the above, the indexes were replete with typos and cop
> yediting mistakes.
>
> I could give specific examples ad nauseam of all the types of mistakes (I
> stopped counting when I got to a hundred).
>
> These are the elements of my dilemma:
>
> 1. Do I simply forget about working for this company, since it clearly
> manifests such an indifference to quality?
> 2. Do I send my resume in but make no reference to the quality issues?
> 3. Do I send my resume in and call the publisher's attention to these
> mistakes?
> 4. Do I write a private letter to the indexer (whose name is given in the
> book)?
> 5. Do I have an obligation to readers in general?
> 6. Which is the higher duty: to say nothing bad about colleagues or to
> improve the quality of indexes?
>
> In the horns,
>
> Maro Riofrancos
> Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
> 290 Riverside Drive, 9A
> New York, NY 10025
> Voice: 212.864.2121
> Fax: 212.222.2921
> Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 12:08:17 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "P. Buell" <pbuell@U.WASHINGTON.EDU>
Subject: Re: database help requested
In-Reply-To: <199705250056.RAA13270@mx2.u.washington.edu>
Sharon: I will do this on list since it might be of interest to others. It
seems to be that you are being asked to write help files? That is, when
userfield1 (and that is a most poor name....) comes up one should, idealy,
be able to ask what is "userfield1" and get a text written by yourself.
You can find out what to put into this text by a) interviewing the
"creators" of the database (I refrain from using "nerds") or b) learning
about how an ACCESS database works and finding out what the links,
properties, etc. are for a given field and using that as the basis for
your help file. Sounds like the "creators" are determined to keep it all
secret and option b) will be the way to go. But you will have to ask them
or those who hired them to explain the purpose of the database etc. You
should also learn to enter data into it to find out how it works in
practical terms. Be prepared, by the way, for an investment of time. If
this is a large database nothing will get done all that quickly. But, in
my experience, an index is not what is needed, but online help files.
However, an online index to access individual help files would be most
helpful as a second stage. Look at the way MS structures its online help
files for Office97 to get some clues (I worked on Word97 and
PowerPoint97, if I can offer an insiders perspective). Paul D. Buell
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 15:29:37 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "D. C. Schroeder" <DrDCS@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: page numbering--heads and subheads
Do Mi,
Thank you for addressing the issue from the readers perspective. I often
check the index to find the main discussion on a topic and have difficulties
finding what I need when the material is overly fragmented. AFTER reading the
main discussion I will often return to the index for the specifics that I
need.
Dawn Schroeder
The Perfect Page
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 15:46:52 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: JPerlman@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: page numbering--heads and subheads
Do Mi,
You'll get no debate from these quarters! I agree with your position
entirely.
I like to give the inclusive pages of the main discussion of a topic after
the main heading, and use the subheads to break out specific aspects of the
main topic. And I do it often.
Janet Perlman
Southwest Indexing
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 15:46:57 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: JPerlman@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Ethical dilemma
In a message dated 97-05-25 13:43:06 EDT, Maro wrote:
<< That begs the question. The reason it's a dilemma is that there are
several
incompatible options, and I'm not sure what my priorities are or ought to
be. >>
Maro,
With all due respects, I think Ann's posting was right on the mark. I think
that all of those incompatible opinions are solved when you prioritize your
goals. That breaks the logjam of several incompatible options, all of which
are important.
You will know how you want to proceed when decide whether you need the money
badly enough to market yourself to this publisher, knowing the type of work
(minimum standards or below standards) that keeps him/her happy, or whether
your principles are that important to you that you need to (a) decide not to
even market yourself to him/her, or (b) make a point of educating the
publisher *and* the indexer.
All of the self-righteousness in the world will not do any good. Action is
the only thing that makes change. And if you decide to go after this
publisher, either to work for him, or to educate him, you're going to spend
time doing it .... lots of time. And it won't earn you any money. In
business, time is money. If you can afford to do this, fine, do it. If not,
you know what you have to do.
But if your goal (goes back to that!), is to earn money, run your business as
profitably as possible, then you need to decide to pass on this publisher and
market yourself to places where you can earn money easily and quickly, and in
a satisfying manner. Alternatively, go ahead and work for this publisher and
do your best and skip the self-righteousness and education portion of things.
Sometimes money drives the choices we make. People who are hungry for work
often don't spend a lot of time solving the world's problems, such as those
of quality vs quantity, or the internal decisions made by one publisher.
I hope you can clarify your feelings and goals and make a choice that is good
for you. Pragmatism would have you just pass on this publisher and move on
to someplace else to market yourself. Idealism would have you dialogue with
this publisher. Good luck in choosing!
Janet Perlman
Southwest Indexing
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 17:23:51 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: page numbering--heads and subheads
I would like to take this discussion a step further and ask about subheads
once you have the larger batch of pages listed under the main entry.
How far down do you break the subheads? For instance.... I'm thinking....
say, for instance, that you have 10 pages on macros broken up into mini
sections of around 2 pages each. I'm sorry that I don't have a specific
example in mind or in progress, but I've hit it in the past. Would you
include each of those mini sections under your main topic, or just leave the
main entry?
I agree that as a reader I would like to have the larger discussion called
out, and I would like the mini discussions called out, also. I don't like to
waste time looking through 10 pages for something specific. I'd rather be
directed to it as quickly as possible. I personally consider even a 5-page
general discussion to be difficult when an additional entry (or additional
entries) could send me right to the topic. Now that doesn't mean that I want
every little idea broken down under the main entry, but I do appreciate it
(again, as a reader) when subtopics of a page or more appear in the index. (I
fully realize that we can't do this all the time due to space constraints,
I've had to chop my share of indexes lately:D)
Any opinions?
Leslie
Frank Words Indexing and Editing
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 17:33:45 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Dick Luxner <dluxner@MA.ULTRANET.COM>
Subject: Re: Number of indexers
Dear Kari,
You said:
>...I've been thrilled, too, to meet so many professionals who freely
>give advice & support. In many (most?) other professions, people get
>so busy being one-up on everyone else and they seem to feel so threatened
>by new members of the profession. Indexers are different...
I, too, am amazed at the wealth of information those with more experience
contribute to newcomers. I subscribe to three other lists in the
information and fund-raising sectors related to my memberships listed in my
signature
below. Many of these people make time in their busy days to give advice on
subjects like: suggestions for finding lost alumni, Internet sources of
hard-to-find real-estate and financial information on prospective donors to
non-profits, a conflict-of-interest dilemma of a consultant who is also a
board member of the non-profit, software for tracking time and expenses,
and the following response from a systems librarian:
>...I work on the technical side of a large home-brew commercial
>database CD system in an academic library. A huge challenge arises
>in getting librarians and patrons to understand why a database that
>worked a few minutes ago is not working now. There can be many
>reasons that fix themselves and no specific cause can be identified.
>I have discovered an explanation that suffices for all these
>'I don't know, nothing's changed' situations.
>
>The Head of Reference called, frantic about a business database that
>was not working. One of the top Business professors had come with a
>critical information need. The database had worked just minutes
>before for a freshman. "What happened?" he asked in desperation. The
>Business professor had left in anger about the failure. I went up to
>the Reference desk to try the database myself. Of course, it worked
>perfectly.
>
>"I promise it didn't work!" he insisted.
>
>"I know it didn't," I replied calmly . "You must remember that
>these machines have a mission in life. And that mission is to make
>you look like an idiot at the worst possible moment. They are
>empowered with a 'Critical Detector'. No matter which machine the
>professor used, the database would not have worked. Now he is gone
>and I am here. You felt bad enough when it didn't work, but now how
>do you feel?"
>
>"Like an idiot," he answered quietly.
>
>"See?" I continued. "Fortunately, we are aware of this mission, so
>the machine's attempt to make you look like an idiot," I looked at
>the machine and spoke sharply "does NOT work!" I turned again to the
>librarian and concluded, "Once it realizes this, it cooperates more
>readily."
>
>As I turned to leave, the librarian smiled in relief. Another step
>in the battle for understanding had been taken.
>
>Debra Lords, dlords@library.utah.edu
>Database Coordinator, ACLIS - Micro Group
>Marriott Library, University of Utah
P.S. We also contribute our (in)famous humor for the weekend, e.g.
"Insanity is hereditary. You get it from your children." - Sam Levenson
Dick
__________________________________________________
Dick Luxner, MLS - Fundraising Research Consultant
PO Box 277 - Stow, Massachusetts 01775
508-562-1288 - dluxner@ma.ultranet.com
Member APRA NEDRA ASIS SLA ASI ALA NENON
__________________________________________________
Neither can his mind be thought to be in tune, whose words do jarre;
Nor his reason in frame, whose sentence is preposterous.
- Ben Jonson, 1641
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 18:52:36 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: JPerlman@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: page numbering--heads and subheads
Leslie,
My idea of perfection is to have the block of pages listed as the general ref
following the main entry, AND subheads for the various blocks of information
in those pages called out separately.
Now .... if there is no way to create subheads, or it is indeed a general
discussion, then there will be no subheads. But sometimes, as in your
example, the text lends itself to subheads also, and I like to call them out
separately.
Of course, if there are publisher constraints on length of the index, this
becomes impossible. But for me it is the best-case scenario.
Janet Perlman
Southwest Indexing
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 22:29:36 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: DStaub11@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: page numbering--heads and subheads
Leslie wrote:
>I would like to take this discussion a step further and ask about subheads
>once you have the larger batch of pages listed under the main entry.
>How far down do you break the subheads? For instance.... I'm thinking....
>say, for instance, that you have 10 pages on macros broken up into mini
>sections of around 2 pages each.
Yes! Depending on the length of the general span (and whether I'm in the
process of chopping the index :-/) I would also make subheads for these
subtopics (which, please note, may or may not follow exactly the subtitles in
the text!).
A problem I often run into: The general span is too long to leave without
also having subheads. But the material is broken into little itty-bitty
pieces, four or five to a page, that don't clump easily into bigger sections.
So I'm stuck with either a long span with no breakdowns (unacceptable) or a
heading that looks like this:
Punctuation, 10-30
apostrophes, 10
colons, 10
commas, 10
periods, 10-11
quotation marks, 11
question marks, 11
semicolons, 11
etc......
Also very annoying, and the kind of apparent overanalysis that usually flags
a poor index. A situation with no good solution; I usually pick the second
one in the interests of more information rather than less. What do other
people do in this kind of situation?
Also--let's please remember that any subheads that are important topics in
themselves should also be main headings. If the reader is interested
specifically in that topic, they will look it up under itself. So with
subhead analysis, we're looking at how to break down the information in the
main heading efficiently.
Do Mi
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 25 May 1997 21:13:59 -0600
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Caroline Parks <caroline@MACK.RT66.COM>
Subject: Re: page numbering--heads and subheads
In-Reply-To: <199705260233.UAA24904@Rt66.com>
We had this discussion at Lori Lathrop's Indexing Skills Workshop last
November. A rule in Lori's "Tips for Creating a Great Index" reads,
"Place page references (locators) with the lowest-level entries; if a
primary entry has secondary entries, use page references with the secondary
entries only....[more of the same about tertiary-level entries]."
Lori agreed that the only exception she would make to that rule would be
the instance brought up in the previous couple of posts: where the main
heading gets the locators for the entire discussion (or perhaps a chapter),
and the subheads break out the specific topics within that discussion.
This makes sense, and so far, it's pretty consistent with the current
thread here. But what about a situation where the main discussion of a
topic can be broken into subheads, and there are also references to other
aspects of that topic scattered throughout the rest of the book?
something general, 102-115
something specific, 109-113
another specific thing, 102-105
something else specific, 74
..... (the rest of the specifics within 102-115)
Obviously the topic on p. 74 will probably also be a main head. But I
think the concern here is that some readers will assume that the only place
the topic is covered is on pp. 102-115, and never suspect that there's
another piece on p. 74, especially if it's buried in a long list of subs.
I can see two options. Either bring the extra locators up to the main
heading as well, or leave the locator off the main head altogether. Are
there other possibilities? And what would others do here?
____________________________
Caroline Parks -- Indexcellence
Indexing and Editorial Services
Tijeras, NM
505-286-2738
caroline@rt66.com
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 01:02:03 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: page numbering--heads and subheads
In a message dated 97-05-25 22:33:33 EDT, Do Mi writes:
<< So I'm stuck with either a long span with no breakdowns (unacceptable) or
a
heading that looks like this:
Punctuation, 10-30
apostrophes, 10
colons, 10
commas, 10
periods, 10-11
quotation marks, 11
question marks, 11
semicolons, 11
etc...... >>
In this situation I might consider
Punctuation, 10-30. See also specific forms of punctuation
Then I would enter each specific entry as a main entry.
On the other hand, I would wait to see if I get other entries for the forms
of punctuation. If I have several locators for each subentry, I do not worry
that I have included all those page numbers in the first place. This is one
instance where I save my editing 'til the end.
Leslie
Frank Words Indexing and Editing (was once LLF Editorial Services)
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 20:53:09 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Ann Norcross <norcross@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Multiple indexes
I have question for readers, and indexers, of computer books. I am
indexing an 800-page book about Netscape. The first 650 pages are about
using the various components of the product. The last 150 pages contain
nothing but Internet addresses and brief descriptions of interesting Net
resources that the user can visit using the product.
Here's my question: would it be useful to put the index for that last
chapter in a separate index, by itself? The index for that chapter
alone runs for 12 two-column pages.
In "Indexing Books," Nancy Mulvaney says:
" Multiple indexes can be useful with discrete types of entries that can
stand alone in their own index. Quite often a secondary index is a
specialized subset of the general subject index. The different indexes
are designed for different types of users, with one group having more
specialized subject knowledge than the other group."
She goes on to say that of course each index should have a title, and
should refer to the other index in an introductory note.
The reason I want to do this is because the 12 pages of Internet sites,
spread throughout the 35 pages of the whole index, are (to me)
distracting. I'm thinking that people look in the index for two very
different reasons: to find places to go, and to find out how to do
things. Of course, of the down side, pulling out the Net resource
entries eliminates any chance of serendipity for the reader who is
searching for "Close button" and comes across "Clothing optional." :-)
What is your opinion of having two indexes, with introductory notes (per
Mulvaney) of "Following the General Index is a Net Resources Index" and
Preceding the Net Resources Index is the General Index" ?
Thanks,
Ann Norcross
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 13:48:06 -0500
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Carol Roberts <Carol.Roberts@MIXCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Ethical Dilemma
In-Reply-To: <199705260404.XAA07186@mixcom.mixcom.com>
Maro, I agree with what Ann and Janet have said, and I'd like to add a
comment about assumptions about the publisher. When I publisher allows
crummy indexes in some of their books, what can we conclude? Not much, I
think. The author might have been willing to pay only peanuts for the index
and gotten a very inexperienced indexer. The indexer might have been
required to produce the index overnight. The editor might be very
inexperienced and just not know what to look for in an index.
My point is that I don't think you can assume that the press *doesn't want*
good indexes just because you've seen some trashy indexes from them. So how
much does it cost you to make your pitch to this press? If they're
interested in giving you a try and can meet your price, then what
difference does it make that they've settled for some bad indexing in the
past? If you are otherwise interested in this client, I say go for it.
Good luck. 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, 26 May 1997 16:49:33 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: John Wilson <JWilson999@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: database help requested
Here's another consideration. This "index" you're creating sounds like a
typical data dictionary and I assume it's to be used by both functional (bus
analysts and users) and technical types (programmers, database admins, system
admins, etc). I'm not familiar with MACREX or CINDEX yet, but leave room for
entries covering the uses of the generic fields (e.g., user field 1 actually
used for pay rate); this is apparently off-the-shelf software that the
company doesn't want to customize, i.e., they want to retain the vanilla
version to make it easier to upgrade to later versions. Also, leave room for
a description of the uses of each generic field (i.e., those fields whose
field names, literals, and/or labels don't describe the actual use) and a
data type indicator (e.g., alphanumeric with valid values 1, 2, 3, a, b, and
c). If these fields appear on some user screen, then you might want to look
into adding an entry for the screen name on which a given field appears.
Incidentally, much of this information ought to be in some documentation that
came with the software (??).
Just my two cents.
Good luck.
John Wilson
Atlanta, GA
jwilson999@aol.com
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 15:35:43 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Ann Norcross <norcross@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Water cooler chat: Hitting the wall
Hi, all -
Anybody around? I've just hit a wall in my final index edit--I was just
describing it to another idexer--that wall where suddenly all your words
look like an unrealted bunch or crap that will never, EVER become an
index? That wall? Anyway, just taking a little break, looking for some
brain-restoring chit-chat (and I'm have a little snack, and will go
outside for 5 or 10 minutes--those are the things that let my brain
relax and get back to work).
Ann
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 22:57:37 -0500
Reply-To: jspool@uie.com
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <jspool@world.std.com>
From: "Jared M. Spool" <jspool@UIE.COM>
Organization: User Interface Engineering
Subject: Course: Product Usability For Doc Professionals
If you are a technical writer, training developer, graphic designer,
editor, web designer, documentation manager, or information
developer, please join us for
PRODUCT USABILITY FOR DOCUMENTATION PROFESSIONALS
Tewksbury, MA
June 25-26, 1997
This 2-day course is designed to get you exactly where you want to go
-- to a product that your customers learn easily, use frequently, and
love.
Previous courses have attracted attendees from all over the world.
This course will sell out -- register today!
__________________
What You'll Learn
Discover techniques that will dramatically change the way you build
products, without requiring any more time, money, or people!
+ Get the information you need to develop your documentation
much earlier in the design process, even before coding begins
+ Lead a diverse development team to consensus on key issues
in just 45 minutes
+ Gather information on how your users work and what
constraints your design needs to address
+ Incorporate the latest usability research On-line Help, Cue Cards,
Wizards, and Web Sites
+ Prevent common usability problems by focusing on a few proven
design basics
+ Conduct inexpensive usability tests to discover how your users
learn and use your product and its documentation, before the
documentation is even written
+ Dramatically improve your product's effectiveness with
simple techniques such as tips and hints
The high point of the course is our design competition. Using
everything you've learned, you'll build a fully-working product in
just a few hours. You'll apply your new-found knowledge and have a
blast collaborating with your peers!
This course is taught by Jared M. Spool and Tara Scanlon,
recognized experts in software and documentation usability.
_____________
Course Costs
This course costs just $620 per person, or $545 each per
person if four or more people from your company register
at the same time.
And, if you register by June 11th, you'll receive a one-year
subscription to our newsletter, Eye For Design.
Seating is limited, so register early!
________________
Course Location
We are holding Product Usability for Documentation Professionals at
the Holiday Inn Andover/Tewksbury. We have reserved a block of rooms
at a special rate for course attendees. Contact the Tewksbury
Holiday Inn (508-640-9000) before June 11th to reserve your room.
____________
To Register
By Fax: (508) 975-5353
By Email: Courses@uie.com
By Web: http://www.uie.com
By Phone: (800) 588-8955 or (508) 975-4343
By Mail: User Interface Engineering
800 Turnpike Street, #101
North Andover, MA 01845
___________
Order Form
___ Yes! I can't wait to attend Product Usability For Documentation
Professionals in Tewksbury, MA on June 25th & 26th, 1997 -- $620.00
per person or $545.00 each for 4 or more. I understand that if I
register before June 11th, I will receive a full year's subscription
to Eye For Design.
___ Maybe. I'd like to see the eight-page brochure which describes
the details of this course. Please fax it to the number below.
___ No, I can't attend this course. But I am interested in hearing
about future events.
Name: ______________________________________________
Title: ______________________________________________
Email: ______________________________________________
Organization: ______________________________________
Address: ___________________________________________
City/State/Zip/Country: ____________________________
Daytime Phone: _____________________________________
Fax Number: _______________________________________
<6/97-IL>
Payment Information:
___ Check enclosed (Payable to User Interface Engineering)
___ NET 15 Purchase Order # _________ (PO must be faxed with registration)
___ Mastercard
___ Visa
___ American Express
___ Discover
Account #: __________________________________________
Expiration Date: ____________________________________
Substitions may be made at any time. We will accept cancellations
made two weeks before the course, subject to a $40 service charge.
Confirmed registrants who do not attend or cancel within two weeks of
the course will be elligible for enrollment in future courses at no
additional cost.
All cancellations must be made in writing.
Seating is limited -- register today!
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 13:25:33 +1000
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Jonathan Jermey <Diagonal@ONAUSTRALIA.COM.AU>
Subject: Book/let on indexing computer books
Hi all,
There are very often detailed discussions on the list about issues in the
indexing of books about various aspects of computing.
I for one would be interested in a publication on this subject. Perhaps it
could be done in the same series as Hazel Bell's on Indexing Biographies.
I haven't seen that one, but believe it was published by the SI (UK) or
someone else in the UK.
What do other people think?
Glenda.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 23:00:48 EDT
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Suellen Kasoff <lserve@JUNO.COM>
Subject: Re: Ethical dilemma
Is this indexer a member of ASI? (Don't tell me who it is. I probably
don't know them anyway.)
On Sun, 25 May 1997 13:40:16 -0400 Maro Riofrancos
<riofrancos@WORLDNET.ATT.NET> writes:
>That begs the question. The reason it's a dilemma is that there are
>several
>incompatible options, and I'm not sure what my priorities are or ought
>to
>be.
>
>Maro Riofrancos
>Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
>290 Riverside Drive, 9A
>New York, NY 10025
>Voice: 212.864.2121
>Fax: 212.222.2921
>Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Virginia G. McHenry [SMTP:vmchenry@IX.NETCOM.COM]
>Sent: Sunday, May 25, 1997 12:32 PM
>To: Multiple recipients of list INDEX-L
>Subject: Re: Ethical dilemma
>
>Mario,
>
>My son, the soon to be graduate of psychology, recently gave me some
>excellent advice I will pass on - "What is your goal?":-} The answer
>to
>that question frequently answers ethical dilemmas for me. Ginny
>McHenry
>
>
>Maro Riofrancos wrote:
>>
>> I was considering trying to get work from a major publisher of
>computer
>> books. Out of curiosity, I took a look at a couple of indexes to
>their
>> books.
>>
>> I was stunned by what I found. One of the indexes was easily one of
>the
>> worst indexes I have ever come across in my 25 years as an indexer,
>the
>> other was just very bad.
>>
>> The kinds of mistakes I found covered the entire range of
>possibilities:
>>
>> 1. missing page references.
>> 2. important topics covered extensively in the text entirely missing
>from
>> the index.
>> 3. exactly synonymous terms indexed separately with no
>cross-references
>> between the synonyms, so that each of the synonyms ended up with
>different
>> page numbers.
>> 4. double posting with nonmatching sets of page numbers.
>> 5. indexing of terms mentioned only in passing, with no attendant
>> discussion.
>> 6. obvious ignorance of the meaning of basic terms of art.
>> 7. misalphabetization and inconsistent alphabetization.
>> 8. In addition to the above, the indexes were replete with typos and
>cop
>> yediting mistakes.
>>
>> I could give specific examples ad nauseam of all the types of
>mistakes (I
>> stopped counting when I got to a hundred).
>>
>> These are the elements of my dilemma:
>>
>> 1. Do I simply forget about working for this company, since it
>clearly
>> manifests such an indifference to quality?
>> 2. Do I send my resume in but make no reference to the quality
>issues?
>> 3. Do I send my resume in and call the publisher's attention to
>these
>> mistakes?
>> 4. Do I write a private letter to the indexer (whose name is given
>in the
>> book)?
>> 5. Do I have an obligation to readers in general?
>> 6. Which is the higher duty: to say nothing bad about colleagues or
>to
>> improve the quality of indexes?
>>
>> In the horns,
>>
>> Maro Riofrancos
>> Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
>> 290 Riverside Drive, 9A
>> New York, NY 10025
>> Voice: 212.864.2121
>> Fax: 212.222.2921
>> Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
>
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 09:58:51 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Multiple indexes
Ann,
In an ideal world, your idea sounds like a good one. It make sense to me to
put those resources in one index. But, I come more and more to believe that
the average reader may never know that there are two indexes. With a note
referring to the fact that there are two indexes appearing only on the first
page, and most/many index users heading to specific alphabetical spots in the
index, I think that index users never or seldom notice that there are two
indexes and that they are missing out on a whole section of information. For
that reason, I would keep the information in a single index. I might do
something like this
Net Resources, 150-180. See also specific resources
or some such thing.
Good luck. It sounds like you're really pounding away at this one.
Leslie
Frank Words Indexing and Editing
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 10:02:28 -0400
Reply-To: vmchenry@ix.netcom.com
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Virginia G. McHenry" <vmchenry@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Organization: Exceptional Results, Inc.
Subject: Re: Multiple indexes
Ann,
As a frequent user of indices and of Netscape I think a separate index
is a wonderful idea. You are right, when I am trying to figure out how
to add a signature to my email I don't particularly want to deal with a
directory of wonderful web pages although if the answer to my question
or an example is on a web page I would like to know that. BTW, do you
know how to add a signature in Netscape? I haven't been able to locate
that information in the current book and have received no response from
the techies at Netscape - seems the support help feature of most
software packages leaves a bit to be desired. :-> Thanks. Ginny
Ann Norcross wrote:
>
> I have question for readers, and indexers, of computer books. I am
> indexing an 800-page book about Netscape. The first 650 pages are about
> using the various components of the product. The last 150 pages contain
> nothing but Internet addresses and brief descriptions of interesting Net
> resources that the user can visit using the product.
>
> Here's my question: would it be useful to put the index for that last
> chapter in a separate index, by itself? The index for that chapter
> alone runs for 12 two-column pages.
>
> In "Indexing Books," Nancy Mulvaney says:
>
> " Multiple indexes can be useful with discrete types of entries that can
> stand alone in their own index. Quite often a secondary index is a
> specialized subset of the general subject index. The different indexes
> are designed for different types of users, with one group having more
> specialized subject knowledge than the other group."
>
> She goes on to say that of course each index should have a title, and
> should refer to the other index in an introductory note.
>
> The reason I want to do this is because the 12 pages of Internet sites,
> spread throughout the 35 pages of the whole index, are (to me)
> distracting. I'm thinking that people look in the index for two very
> different reasons: to find places to go, and to find out how to do
> things. Of course, of the down side, pulling out the Net resource
> entries eliminates any chance of serendipity for the reader who is
> searching for "Close button" and comes across "Clothing optional." :-)
>
> What is your opinion of having two indexes, with introductory notes (per
> Mulvaney) of "Following the General Index is a Net Resources Index" and
> Preceding the Net Resources Index is the General Index" ?
>
> Thanks,
> Ann Norcross
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 07:13:06 +0000
Reply-To: lbindex@picard.omn.com
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Lee Ellen Brower <lbindex@PICARD.OMN.COM>
Organization: Brower Indexing Services
Subject: Colorado, Indexers in
I'd like to know if you are in North-Central Colorado (North of Denver)
and actively indexing. Purpose: collaboration on upcoming multi-volume
history project.
Lee Brower
Loveland, Colorado
970 663-6833
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 10:54:02 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Jan C. Wright" <JanCW@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Multiple indexes
In a message dated 97-05-27 09:34:47 EDT, you write:
>
> What is your opinion of having two indexes, with introductory notes (per
> Mulvaney) of "Following the General Index is a Net Resources Index" and
> Preceding the Net Resources Index is the General Index" ?
>
This seems like one situation that would be perfect for two indexes. In
addition to the header note, one thing that might be effective is to have the
index pages repeat the header note on each page of the index at the bottom.
"A Net Resources index, listing each Web site and internet resource by name,
follows this general index." at the bottom of each page, in italics or
something. I have done this kind of repeated note on each page with
software-related print indexes where the majority of actual information on
how to use the software is online, and the print piece is just an overview.
Another idea is to have running headers and footers that repeat the idea
"General index" and "Net Resources index."
I think people miss header notes, so every clue you can give them helps.
Jan Wright
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 11:03:43 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Kamm Y. Schreiner" <skysoft@CCT.INFI.NET>
Subject: Re: Multiple indexes
Ann,
As a person who might read a book like the one you are indexing I would, as
a reader, strongly prefer two separate indexes. It really does seem to me
that from your description that you could almost create two separate books
from the "one" that you are indexing. There are certainly two very
different and distinct subject matters. I (personally) would probably never
look at the internet sites portion of that book and would not want
references to them needlessly complicating and enlarging the index to the
information that I would want to read.
Happy Indexing!
Kamm Schreiner
President
SKY Software
4675 York Rd #1
Manchester, MD 21102
email: kamm@sky-software.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 11:16:14 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: DStaub11@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Water cooler chat: Hitting the wall
I know exactly what you mean, Ann! (That wall when the words become
meaningless...) Happens to everybody. The only thing to do at that point is
take a break and talk to someone else, as you're doing; then get back to it
and trust yourself. Trust that the entries you made before you hit the wall
were indeed good ones. Go through the familiar steps of editing. You'll come
out the other side. Good luck!
Do Mi
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 11:51:16 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: JPerlman@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Water cooler chat: Hitting the wall
On hitting the wall .....
I clear my head at those times by going out into the garden and checking on
how my growing things are doing, watering, sprinkling, observing the roses,
the hummingbirds, etc. Looking into the distance, ie, the blue sky, the
distant mountains, is wonderful for relaxing computer-weary eyes, too.
A refreshing 15 minute break like that does wonders! (for me, at least)
Janet Perlman
Southwest Indexing
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 11:45:52 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Maro Riofrancos <riofrancos@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: Ethical dilemma
Yes, sad to say.
Maro Riofrancos
Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
290 Riverside Drive, 9A
New York, NY 10025
Voice: 212.864.2121
Fax: 212.222.2921
Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Suellen Kasoff [SMTP:lserve@JUNO.COM]
Sent: Monday, May 26, 1997 11:01 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list INDEX-L
Subject: Re: Ethical dilemma
Is this indexer a member of ASI? (Don't tell me who it is. I probably
don't know them anyway.)
On Sun, 25 May 1997 13:40:16 -0400 Maro Riofrancos
<riofrancos@WORLDNET.ATT.NET> writes:
>That begs the question. The reason it's a dilemma is that there are
>several
>incompatible options, and I'm not sure what my priorities are or ought
>to
>be.
>
>Maro Riofrancos
>Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
>290 Riverside Drive, 9A
>New York, NY 10025
>Voice: 212.864.2121
>Fax: 212.222.2921
>Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Virginia G. McHenry [SMTP:vmchenry@IX.NETCOM.COM]
>Sent: Sunday, May 25, 1997 12:32 PM
>To: Multiple recipients of list INDEX-L
>Subject: Re: Ethical dilemma
>
>Mario,
>
>My son, the soon to be graduate of psychology, recently gave me some
>excellent advice I will pass on - "What is your goal?":-} The answer
>to
>that question frequently answers ethical dilemmas for me. Ginny
>McHenry
>
>
>Maro Riofrancos wrote:
>>
>> I was considering trying to get work from a major publisher of
>computer
>> books. Out of curiosity, I took a look at a couple of indexes to
>their
>> books.
>>
>> I was stunned by what I found. One of the indexes was easily one of
>the
>> worst indexes I have ever come across in my 25 years as an indexer,
>the
>> other was just very bad.
>>
>> The kinds of mistakes I found covered the entire range of
>possibilities:
>>
>> 1. missing page references.
>> 2. important topics covered extensively in the text entirely missing
>from
>> the index.
>> 3. exactly synonymous terms indexed separately with no
>cross-references
>> between the synonyms, so that each of the synonyms ended up with
>different
>> page numbers.
>> 4. double posting with nonmatching sets of page numbers.
>> 5. indexing of terms mentioned only in passing, with no attendant
>> discussion.
>> 6. obvious ignorance of the meaning of basic terms of art.
>> 7. misalphabetization and inconsistent alphabetization.
>> 8. In addition to the above, the indexes were replete with typos and
>cop
>> yediting mistakes.
>>
>> I could give specific examples ad nauseam of all the types of
>mistakes (I
>> stopped counting when I got to a hundred).
>>
>> These are the elements of my dilemma:
>>
>> 1. Do I simply forget about working for this company, since it
>clearly
>> manifests such an indifference to quality?
>> 2. Do I send my resume in but make no reference to the quality
>issues?
>> 3. Do I send my resume in and call the publisher's attention to
>these
>> mistakes?
>> 4. Do I write a private letter to the indexer (whose name is given
>in the
>> book)?
>> 5. Do I have an obligation to readers in general?
>> 6. Which is the higher duty: to say nothing bad about colleagues or
>to
>> improve the quality of indexes?
>>
>> In the horns,
>>
>> Maro Riofrancos
>> Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
>> 290 Riverside Drive, 9A
>> New York, NY 10025
>> Voice: 212.864.2121
>> Fax: 212.222.2921
>> Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
>
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 12:52:53 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Karl E. Vogel" <vogelke@C17.WPAFB.AF.MIL>
Organization: Sumaria Systems Inc.
Subject: Re: Multiple indexes
>> On Mon, 26 May 1997 20:53:09 -0400,
>> Ann Norcross <norcross@ix.netcom.com> said:
A> I have question for readers, and indexers, of computer books. I am indexing
A> an 800-page book about Netscape. The first 650 pages are about using the
A> various components of the product. The last 150 pages contain nothing but
A> Internet addresses and brief descriptions of interesting Net resources that
A> the user can visit using the product.
A> Here's my question: would it be useful to put the index for that last
A> chapter in a separate index, by itself? The index for that chapter alone
A> runs for 12 two-column pages.
Good idea. The book "Secrets of the Net Super-Searchers" (yeah, I know, I
didn't make up the title :) does this, and it's quite useful. The index is
only about two pages long. If it were any longer, I'd wish for something
like a keyword-at-line or keyword-in-context index.
--
Karl Vogel vogelke@c17.wpafb.af.mil
ASC/YCOA, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433 937-255-3688
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 14:12:51 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Ann Norcross <norcross@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Multiple indexes
Thanks for all the feedback on this question of multiple indexes (more
is welcome, too). I did indeed finish the big book on time, and sent it
off. As another indexer pointed out to me, it is WAY too late to
introduce such a stylistic change in this particular book, but I think I
will approach the publisher with this idea for future books. I would
like to use quotes from the posts here on INDEX-L as part of my
presentation to them; I will contact each poster offline to ask for
permission first, and I don't have to use names, if people prefer that.
I can just say, "Certain well-known indexers..." :-)
I was thinking of having the introductory notes as running headers or
footers, so I was glad to see Jan's suggestion; I've never really
understood how introductory notes could be of much use to the reader,
but that seemed like a heretical thought so I never said anything!
Thanks all,
Ann Norcross
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 14:24:31 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Ann Norcross <norcross@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Water cooler chat: Hitting the wall
JPerlman@AOL.COM wrote:
>
> On hitting the wall .....
>
> I clear my head at those times by going out into the garden and checking on
> how my growing things are doing, watering, sprinkling, observing the roses,
> the hummingbirds, etc. Looking into the distance, ie, the blue sky, the
> distant mountains, is wonderful for relaxing computer-weary eyes, too.
I went out and walked barefoot around my back yard, in a light rain, and
said hello to all my trees. Then I came in and kicked some index butt!
A.
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 16:13:33 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: WordenDex@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Water cooler chat: Hitting the wall
Ann,
I've got 160 *more* lines to cut before dawn, but I'm off very shortly to
play tennis.
Probably no possums will clutter my path.
Diane
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 19:38:27 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Paul Corrington <PaulCorri@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Water cooler chat: Hitting the wall
Ann -
When I get to the point where I just want to hit the wall - I jump in the
swimming pool!!!! Just 5-10 minutes works wonders. In Arizona, you can do
this "most" of the time too.
Paul Corrington
Corringtin Indexing Service
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 20:54:29 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Richard Evans <infodex@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject: Embedded page counts.
How do you determine the page count when working on an embedded index?
Suppose you print the document and generate 100 pages. You index from the
100 pages (using CINDEX, for instance) then embed the tags and return the
file to the client. The client prints it with a different font and only
generates 95 pages.
Dick Evans
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 21:49:13 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Maro Riofrancos <riofrancos@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: Embedded page counts.
Where did you get the document from in the first place, if not the client?
If you are using the same program, whether word processor or DTP program,
and the same font as the client did, there will of course be no discrepancy
in page breaks.
If you use a different program and/or font, then you use hard page breaks
for the document you print out, using the client-supplied hard copy to
determine the location of the breaks. Of course you'd have to adjust either
the font type or size or the paper size setting in order to make the text
fit in the pages you print out.
If the client did not supply hard copy, and you use a different program
and/or font, then you'd have no idea where the page breaks are in the first
place, and you wouldn't be able to type the page numbers for your index
entries into Cindex or any other program.
But the implication of your question is that the client supplied the
original document into which to embed the index. If that's the case, I
assume you must have the same program the client uses, otherwise how could
you embed the index in the "original document"?. So what's the problem?
Maro Riofrancos
Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
290 Riverside Drive, 9A
New York, NY 10025
Voice: 212.864.2121
Fax: 212.222.2921
Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Evans [SMTP:infodex@MINDSPRING.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 1997 8:54 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list INDEX-L
Subject: Embedded page counts.
How do you determine the page count when working on an embedded index?
Suppose you print the document and generate 100 pages. You index from the
100 pages (using CINDEX, for instance) then embed the tags and return the
file to the client. The client prints it with a different font and only
generates 95 pages.
Dick Evans
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 22:46:00 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Richard Evans <infodex@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject: Re: Embedded page counts.
At 09:49 PM 5/27/97 -0400, you wrote:
>But the implication of your question is that the client supplied the
>original document into which to embed the index. If that's the case, I
>assume you must have the same program the client uses, otherwise how could
>you embed the index in the "original document"?. So what's the problem?
Let me rephrase the question. Suppose I count 100 pages and the client
counts 95. What are some possible explanations for such a discrepancy?
Dick Evans
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 21:59:39 -0500
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Pat Fowler <psfowler@TEXOMA.NET>
Subject: Water cooler chat: hitting the wall
Kari Bero wrote:
<snip>
>I've been thrilled, too, to meet so many professionals who freely give advice
>& support. In many (most?) other professions, people get so busy being one-
>up on everyone else and they seem to feel so threatened by new members of the
>profession. Indexers are different. We're definitely a rare breed. 8-)
I would really like to second this. I am a newbe indexer ( I've now done 3
books ) and have found this list invaluable. I have received so much
advice and encouragement from many of you. I hope someday I can pass along
advice to someone new as well.
And to Ann Norcross:
Thanks for starting the water cooler chat about hitting the wall. I was
beginning to think that it only happened to me. I have experienced that
wall on each of the 3 indexes that I have done. It is encouraging to
know that it happens to other people too. It seems to help to just put
the index aside for a while and do other things.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~
Pat Fowler
Pat Fowler Professional Indexing
2009 Oak Creek Circle
Sherman, Texas 75090
(903) 893-6692
email psfowler@texoma.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 23:00:54 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Maro Riofrancos <riofrancos@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
Subject: Re: Embedded page counts.
Without knowing the program you used, it's hard to tell.
If you're using Microsoft Word, for instance, when you hide the index field
codes and their contents, the embedded index does not affect the visible
size of the document. When you show the embedded index, however, the
embedded index entries do take up space and this bumps everything down,
which can add pages to the document. This is a stupid design oversight on
the part of Word's programmers, but that's the way it is. Is it possible
that you sent the publisher the document with the embedded index showing,
and they hid the index for their page count?
Maro Riofrancos
Riofrancos & Co. Indexes
290 Riverside Drive, 9A
New York, NY 10025
Voice: 212.864.2121
Fax: 212.222.2921
Email: riomaro@riofrancos.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Evans [SMTP:infodex@MINDSPRING.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 1997 10:46 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list INDEX-L
Subject: Re: Embedded page counts.
At 09:49 PM 5/27/97 -0400, you wrote:
>But the implication of your question is that the client supplied the
>original document into which to embed the index. If that's the case, I
>assume you must have the same program the client uses, otherwise how could
>you embed the index in the "original document"?. So what's the problem?
Let me rephrase the question. Suppose I count 100 pages and the client
counts 95. What are some possible explanations for such a discrepancy?
Dick Evans
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 20:33:39 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "P. Buell" <pbuell@U.WASHINGTON.EDU>
Subject: Re: Embedded page counts.
In-Reply-To: <199705280303.UAA11054@mx2.u.washington.edu>
Or is the receiver using Word97, which will generate different page counts
(i.e., pagination) than Word 6.0/7.0, for example? What I have learned is
that Word97 is quite incompatable with earlier versions for indexing
purposes. Paul D. Buell
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 01:07:59 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Water cooler chat: Hitting the wall
When I hit the wall, I don't see a garbled index so much as I see garbled
words. I lose my ability to recognize correct spelling, and the most common
words look ridiculous. I've had times when "of" looked so wrong I didn't know
what to do. And today the "wall word" was "control." I had to make sure I was
referencing controls properly and suddenly the word looked completely wrong.
I almost had to check a dictionary to be sure. Anyway, I sympathize with the
syndrome and taking a break is the only cure.
Leslie
Frank Words Indexing and Editing
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 01:24:10 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Locatelli@AOL.COM
Subject: Multiple indexes
I'd be most careful about making a decision to have more than one index. No
matter what steps are taken to let readers know there are two indexes, some
will miss that information. In addition, having two indexes means that we
impose an additional task on the readers. Not only must they find the
information they are looking for in the index, they much first find the
correct index. And that can be a pain in the gesundtheit. (I know, I speak
from personal experience.)
After all, if we are indexing the **subjects** of the URLs in the index, why
should those subject entries be segregated from the rest of the subject
matter of the book? That flies against all we know about the importance of
having a single index. (Or am I missing something here? I certainly would
have problems with actual URLs appearing in the index. But why should they,
if the index **points** to them?)
The argument for separate indexes doesn't seem to me to make any more sense
the the argument for having separate name/place/subject indexes, which most
of us agree is inappropriate. If it is, can someone explain the conceptual
difference to me.
Fred Leise
Between the Lines Indexing and Editorial Services
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 09:17:05 -0500
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Anne Taylor <sactayl@UMSLVMA.UMSL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Multiple indexes
At 01:24 AM 5/28/97 -0400, you wrote:
>I'd be most careful about making a decision to have more than one index. No
>matter what steps are taken to let readers know there are two indexes, some
>will miss that information. In addition, having two indexes means that we
>impose an additional task on the readers. Not only must they find the
>information they are looking for in the index, they much first find the
>correct index. And that can be a pain in the gesundtheit. (I know, I speak
>from personal experience.)
I'm a rank newbie at indexing, but in my defense I do have a decade of
experience as an academic librarian who often teaches readers to use all
kinds of indexes. All of this is only my personal experience, but a lot of
readers must be reminded to use even a simple index in the back of a
monograph. The level of work and its readers should guide the decision to
use more than one index. (I have, in fact, sent books back to the jobber
if I felt that the index was too poor to cover the work adequately.)
As an example, I wouldn't stick multiple indexes in an introduction to a
subject, but books for scholars and professionals already familiar in the
field should have more complex indexing--they get just as frustrated by too
little indexing and cross referencing, as general readers get with too much.
>After all, if we are indexing the **subjects** of the URLs in the index, why
>should those subject entries be segregated from the rest of the subject
>matter of the book? That flies against all we know about the importance of
>having a single index. (Or am I missing something here? I certainly would
>have problems with actual URLs appearing in the index. But why should they,
>if the index **points** to them?)
Are the URLs scattered throughout the chapters and in the text? In the
index, are you placing them together under a heading such as "URLs"? Or,
are you listing them twice--once under subject and again under URLs? If
the URLs are scattered by subject throughout the index and the reader must
flip back and forth between the text and index to find gather a group of
them... I find that frustrating when I come across it.
>The argument for separate indexes doesn't seem to me to make any more sense
>the the argument for having separate name/place/subject indexes, which most
>of us agree is inappropriate. If it is, can someone explain the conceptual
>difference to me.
I'm afraid I'm still yacking about the reader level and intent of the book...
>Fred Leise
>Between the Lines Indexing and Editorial Services
Don't fry the newbie!
Anne
Anne Cleester Taylor
University of Missouri-St. Louis
Thomas Jefferson Library Reference
sactayl@umslvma.umsl.edu
http://www.umsl.edu/~ataylor
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 08:19:26 -0600
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Caroline Parks <caroline@MACK.RT66.COM>
Subject: Re: Embedded page counts.
In-Reply-To: <199705280336.VAA11530@Rt66.com>
Dick,
This seems like a good bet to me:
>Or is the receiver using Word97, which will generate different page counts
>(i.e., pagination) than Word 6.0/7.0, for example? What I have learned is
>that Word97 is quite incompatable with earlier versions for indexing
>purposes. Paul D. Buell
>
My recent experience was that (1) when the publisher sent me the documents
in Word97 format, I couldn't even open them in Word 7.0, (2) that if the
publisher saved the docs in Word 7.0 format, I had no trouble opening and
indexing them, and (3) they got a *higher* page count than I did. I didn't
argue.
Actually, it just occurs to me that maybe I should have. Typically my page
rate is for *typeset* (ie, proof) pages, and I suspect that when the
document that I indexed flows into Pagemaker or whatever (and when figures,
etc, have been added), the actual page count will likely be somewhat
higher. Oh, well...live and learn.
As far as the page numbers you use when indexing in Cindex or Macrex (prior
to embedding), they are pretty much irrelevant to the final product, except
insofar as you use them to insert the tags. Once the tags are embedded,
the page breaks can migrate wherever they want to, given figure insertions,
etc.
On the other hand, if the publisher is actually using a different font to
figure the page count that determines how much you get paid, I'd cry foul!
It sounds like you need to have a serious conversation with the managing
editor and come up with an acceptable (to you, since it's your livelihood
in question) agreement about what constitutes a "page".
Good luck!
____________________________
Caroline Parks -- Indexcellence
Indexing and Editorial Services
Tijeras, NM
505-286-2738
caroline@rt66.com
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 10:28:34 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Peg Mauer <Pmauer@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Embedded page counts.
In a message dated 97-05-27 21:36:58 EDT, you write:
> How do you determine the page count when working on an embedded index?
> Suppose you print the document and generate 100 pages. You index from the
> 100 pages (using CINDEX, for instance) then embed the tags and return the
> file to the client. The client prints it with a different font and only
> generates 95 pages.
Dick,
Actually, I don't charge by the page when I embed index entries in MS Word or
FrameMaker; I charge by the hour. (This is mainly because the clients are
more likely to be technical writers or corporations, who are used to paying
by the hour and not by the page.) But if I were to want to determine the page
count, assuming that the client sent me the files electronically, I would
count them based on my computer and my printer. If the client sent me a hard
copy, I would use the number of the pages that they sent me. If I printed out
100 pages and then returned the files to the client and they reformatted it
so that it's 95 pages, that's up to them. But I still count it as 100 pages.
Peg Mauer
Communication Link
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 10:35:58 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Peg Mauer <Pmauer@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Embedded page counts.
In a message dated 97-05-27 23:23:41 EDT, you write:
> Let me rephrase the question. Suppose I count 100 pages and the client
> counts 95. What are some possible explanations for such a discrepancy?
Ah! This is a different question! I've had this problem with clients, but not
necessarily anything to do with embedded index entries. I've had clients that
insisted that the manual had 95 indexable pages, while I felt strongly that
it had 100 or 110 indexable pages. (they didn't count pages with full page
illustrations, maps, partial page, etc.) That was with a publisher who was
paying $3.00/page, so I didn't think it was worth squabbling about; I gave in
to their page count because I liked the kind of books that I was indexing for
them.
Peg Mauer
Communication Link
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 08:41:50 -0700
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "P. Buell" <pbuell@U.WASHINGTON.EDU>
Subject: Re: Embedded page counts.
In-Reply-To: <199705281429.HAA28881@mx5.u.washington.edu>
Actually, Word97 doesn't actually convert to Word 6.0/7.0 but creates an
RTF file than can be read by Word 6.0/7.0. This can create real problems
if there is lots of special formatting in a document. Word97 got slammed
for this in the literature, by the way. It is an imperial pain. I say to
members of the list, watch this problem if you are using Word. MicroSoft
strikes again. Paul D. Buell
On Wed, 28 May 1997, Caroline Parks wrote:
> Dick,
>
> This seems like a good bet to me:
>
> >Or is the receiver using Word97, which will generate different page counts
> >(i.e., pagination) than Word 6.0/7.0, for example? What I have learned is
> >that Word97 is quite incompatable with earlier versions for indexing
> >purposes. Paul D. Buell
> >
>
> My recent experience was that (1) when the publisher sent me the documents
> in Word97 format, I couldn't even open them in Word 7.0, (2) that if the
> publisher saved the docs in Word 7.0 format, I had no trouble opening and
> indexing them, and (3) they got a *higher* page count than I did. I didn't
> argue.
>
> Actually, it just occurs to me that maybe I should have. Typically my page
> rate is for *typeset* (ie, proof) pages, and I suspect that when the
> document that I indexed flows into Pagemaker or whatever (and when figures,
> etc, have been added), the actual page count will likely be somewhat
> higher. Oh, well...live and learn.
>
> As far as the page numbers you use when indexing in Cindex or Macrex (prior
> to embedding), they are pretty much irrelevant to the final product, except
> insofar as you use them to insert the tags. Once the tags are embedded,
> the page breaks can migrate wherever they want to, given figure insertions,
> etc.
>
> On the other hand, if the publisher is actually using a different font to
> figure the page count that determines how much you get paid, I'd cry foul!
> It sounds like you need to have a serious conversation with the managing
> editor and come up with an acceptable (to you, since it's your livelihood
> in question) agreement about what constitutes a "page".
>
> Good luck!
> ____________________________
>
> Caroline Parks -- Indexcellence
> Indexing and Editorial Services
>
> Tijeras, NM
> 505-286-2738
> caroline@rt66.com
>
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 11:45:24 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Jan C. Wright" <JanCW@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Embedded page counts.
In a message dated 97-05-27 21:36:36 EDT, infodex@MINDSPRING.COM (Richard
Evans) writes:
>
> How do you determine the page count when working on an embedded index?
> Suppose you print the document and generate 100 pages. You index from the
> 100 pages (using CINDEX, for instance) then embed the tags and return the
> file to the client. The client prints it with a different font and only
> generates 95 pages.
>
I never charge by the page for embedding - there are too many factors
involved. Charge by the entry or by the hour. I prefer hourly, as so many
things can go wrong, and there is troubleshooting to do at the end. Files get
corrupted, files won't compile properly, embedded tags get moved or deleted,
page-ranging bookmarks have naming problems, and the one you have noted --
the printer font and the targeted printer settings change how the book comes
out. Graphics are another question - I receive many files without the
graphics in place, so I have no idea how big the book is in real life.
It doesn't matter if you are using the same exact program and version of the
program -- if you have a different font selected, or if you have a different
printer driver selected, you will come out with a different book length. A
lot of publishers do not use "hard" page breaks, so you get a different
pagination every time you change machines. Whether you have hidden text
showing or turned off can affect it.
The biggest time drain is that, to do a proper edit, you must go back and
edit each embedded tag, as the index is only a snapshot of the document at a
particular time. Otherwise you lose your edits the next time the index is
compiled. It takes forever to do this properly, much longer than the normal
editing cycle.
One last thing -- always compile the index on the same machine that broke the
pages, especially if you are dealing with Word. I have seen situations where
the font was the same, the printer settings were the same, the right drivers
were installed, hard page breaks were used, and the index still came out with
wrong page numbers. You cannot trust it to come out the same on a different
machine, not with the way Word repaginates.
Jan Wright
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 12:04:54 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Karl E. Vogel" <vogelke@C17.WPAFB.AF.MIL>
Organization: Sumaria Systems Inc.
Subject: Re: Multiple indexes
>> On Wed, 28 May 1997 01:24:10 -0400 (EDT),
>> Locatelli@aol.com said:
F> The argument for separate indexes doesn't seem to me to make any more sense
F> the the argument for having separate name/place/subject indexes, which most
F> of us agree is inappropriate.
It depends on the subject matter. For example, Emacs is a programming
environment/religion often mistaken for a text editor (I love it, so I get
to make fun of it). One Emacs motto was "Over 400 easy-to-use commands".
The Emacs user's guide has three separate indexes, and this division has
made it much easier to find things. The guide provides:
* a key index holding the many keyboard macros which make extensive
use of escape and control keys,
* a function index describing routines you can call interactively or
from your own programs, and
* a concept index showing where to find descriptions of fundamental
Emacs things like "buffer" or "macro".
If they jammed all this stuff into one index, it would be a lot less
usable. This may be an exception, but IMO it applies to a lot of computer
stuff.
--
Karl Vogel vogelke@c17.wpafb.af.mil
ASC/YCOA, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433 937-255-3688
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 12:33:00 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Elizabeth Kniss <EINDEX@AOL.COM>
Subject: Re: Multiple indexes
In a message dated 97-05-27 09:36:37 EDT, you write:
<< What is your opinion of having two indexes, with introductory notes (per
Mulvaney) of "Following the General Index is a Net Resources Index" and
Preceding the Net Resources Index is the General Index" ?
>>
I seem to remember reading in an issue of Keywords or the Indexer (some time
during this past year) of a usability study that reviewed the value of
multiple indexes through experimental testing performed on users.
Unfortunately I can't put my fingers on it right now . . . maybe someone
else can?
Anyhow, the bottom line from what I remember, was that the "general user" is
typically unaware of the existence of multiple indexes, and rarely will look
beyond the index they happen to turn to. Hence, the recommendation toward
the preparation of one index verses multiple ones. Hope this is helpful,
wish I could locate the article!
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 12:48:27 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Nancy K Humphreys <NKH@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Subject: backups on Internet
For those who travel a lot or have no safe offsite storage space for disk=
s,
a local computer mag in the Bay Area just ran an article on backing up
files to a site on the Internet. The cost is about $120 a year for varyin=
g
amounts of space/services. The four companies offering this service are: =
DataSaver Online Backup Service www.datasaver.com (New York area only?)
McAfee WebStor and Personal Vault www.mcafee.com 408/988-3832
netTape www.sgii.com 412/415-5200
Connected Online Backup www.connected.com 800/353-3078
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 12:57:43 -0400
Reply-To: vmchenry@ix.netcom.com
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: "Virginia G. McHenry" <vmchenry@IX.NETCOM.COM>
Organization: Exceptional Results, Inc.
Subject: Re: Multiple indexes
Yes! The only real argument I have seen for one index has been that
readers fail to note that there is more than one index. This reminds me
of current television (which I despise) practices of catering to the
lowest denominator. If people can't read what makes you think they will
be reading the book in the first place? I think Karl's point - that
people who can and do read but who are unfamiliar with the subject
initially need help in segregating the subject matter makes much more
sense. Sans publisher restrictions a thorough index or indices acts as
a learning tool. The other thing I think should be addressed is the
audience. If I have gotten anything out of the numerous books on
indexing I have read, it is that the index is a tool to help the
reader. Sometimes what is "right" and what is "wrong" must give way to
what works. Just my 2 cents worth.
Karl E. Vogel wrote:
>
> >> On Wed, 28 May 1997 01:24:10 -0400 (EDT),
> >> Locatelli@aol.com said:
>
> F> The argument for separate indexes doesn't seem to me to make any more sense
> F> the the argument for having separate name/place/subject indexes, which most
> F> of us agree is inappropriate.
>
> It depends on the subject matter. For example, Emacs is a programming
> environment/religion often mistaken for a text editor (I love it, so I get
> to make fun of it). One Emacs motto was "Over 400 easy-to-use commands".
>
> The Emacs user's guide has three separate indexes, and this division has
> made it much easier to find things. The guide provides:
>
> * a key index holding the many keyboard macros which make extensive
> use of escape and control keys,
> * a function index describing routines you can call interactively or
> from your own programs, and
> * a concept index showing where to find descriptions of fundamental
> Emacs things like "buffer" or "macro".
>
> If they jammed all this stuff into one index, it would be a lot less
> usable. This may be an exception, but IMO it applies to a lot of computer
> stuff.
>
> --
> Karl Vogel vogelke@c17.wpafb.af.mil
> ASC/YCOA, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433 937-255-3688
--
Virginia G. McHenry
Exceptional Results, Inc.
PO Box 663
South Plainfield, NJ 07080
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 13:28:28 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Locatelli@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Multiple indexes
The problem with multiple indexes is that they increase search time
considerably. In my newbie days (last year), I indexed a 600-page book with
separate name and subject indexes. When it came time to index the second
volume, I used the first as a reference for how I had treated names. And with
every lookup, I growled at having to flip past the subject index to get to
the name index. How I wished they were combined! And I am an experienced
reader.
Besides the frustration factor, another good argument for a single index is
that separate indexes separate related material, when one function of an
index is to bring together from disparate places material on the same
subject.
For instance, a subject heading "FDR's administration" in the subject index
would be widely separated from the entry on FDR in a name index. Clearly the
material is closely related. Yes, one can solve that by having
cross-references from the name index to subject index, but again, that
creates additional work for the user. And we are agreed that it is important
that the user be considered in all decisions affecting the index.
My .02 for the day, now off to the Newberry.
Fred Leise
Between the Lines Indexing and Editorial Services
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 12:40:57 -0600
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Andre De Tienne <ADETIENN@INDYVAX.IUPUI.EDU>
Subject: Multiple indexes
One solution to attract the reader's attention to the fact that there are
more than one index at the end of the book is simply to have a running head
at the top of the page reading something like "Index 1: Subjects," "Index
2: Names," "Index 3: Citations," etc. That way, readers know instantly
which index they are in, and that there is something else they might want
to examine. Most books have room for a running head, so it should not be a
problem for editors.
I know of one indexer who recently submitted a proposal to index a certain
journal of philosophy, and he suggested to break down the whole thing into
eight separate indexes: Authors, Articles, Book reviews, Names, Subjects,
Bibliographic References, Citations, and Reports & Conferences. Since the
proposed index would constitute a separate volume, such a breakdown is not
as problematic as it could be at the end of a book. The fact that most
readers would not think of looking at more than one index is never a good
argument against having more than one index, by the way. The decision to
break down an index into separate parts must depend only on parameters
internal to the work that is indexed (complexity, quantity, depth, breadth,
type of work, readership, etc.). The equation "one index = greatest ease
of use" is a fallacy if it claims to apply universally. There are
certainly many cases in which breaking down an index increases its
usability. An index should strive more to do justice to the work than to
defer to the reader's potential intellectual laziness or rigidity, as far
as is economically feasible.
Andre De Tienne
********************************************************************
Andre De Tienne Tel.(H): 317-328-8789
HyperIndex Tel.(W): 317-274-2033
7590 Harcourt Road # 106 Fax: 317-274-2347
Indianapolis, IN 46260-3143 E-mail: adetienn@iupui.edu
********************************************************************
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 14:36:03 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Wildefire@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Embedded page counts.
In a message dated 97-05-27 21:37:24 EDT, Dick wrote:
> How do you determine the page count when working on an embedded index?
> Suppose you print the document and generate 100 pages. You index from the
> 100 pages (using CINDEX, for instance) then embed the tags and return the
> file to the client. The client prints it with a different font and only
> generates 95 pages.
>
Hi Dick,
This is one reason why I insist that the client print and send me a hard copy
of the book along with the files for embedded indexing projects. That way,
it's printed in their font with their pagination. If they doubt the page
count that I bill them for, they can easily verify it because I've generated
it using the hard copy that they've sent me. This is aside from the obvious
advantages of not having to print it out yourself. :-)
Lynn Moncrief
TECHindex & Docs
Technical and Scientific Indexing
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 14:56:47 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Nancy K Humphreys <NKH@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Subject: multiple indexes for resources
First, I'd add to this discussion that I'd list the range of pages and an=
y
cross-references for resources, such as the 150 pages of Internet resourc=
es
in your Netscape book, under the words "help" and "troubleshooting" as
well as the word "resources", if that is what the purpose of any of these=
Internet sites were. Secondly, because all the listings are Internet
resources (rather than print) it strikes me that if indexers had more tim=
e
and the chance to work with production staff, some kind of boxed inset in=
middle of the index under "I" for Internet resources would be a better
solution than a separate index... I agree with the person who says reader=
s
often don't read notes or look for multiple indexes. =
=========================================================================
Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 14:02:18 -0500
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Carol Roberts <Carol.Roberts@MIXCOM.COM>
Subject: Cross-refs
I'm wondering what y'all would do in the following situation. Let's say you
want only two levels of entry, main and sub, so you end up with a couple of
entries like this (they will each have subs later on):
perspective, linear
perspective, multiple-station-point
Then you have the dichotomy "experience vs. concept" mentioned, which turns
out to be really about perspective (all kinds). Rather than making a
cross-ref. to each kind of perspective (I might end up with more than 2
before I'm done), I'm tempted to make a general cross-ref. to
"perspective," trusting that the reader will see that there are several
entries for "perspective":
experience vs. concept
See perspective
perspective, linear
perspective, multiple-station-point
I know there's a worry that the perspective entries might end up on
separate pages in the index, but I'm assuming that that reader will flip
the page, just as she or he would to find out whether there were any more
subs. Is this a legitimate way to handle cross-refs?
Although I didn't find anything about it in Wellisch's _Indexing from A to
Z_, in Mulvany's _Indexing Books_ (p. 107), I found this: "Clarity,
however, should never be sacrificed to succinctness. Given the sample
entries below, a cross-reference such as '_See_ LIST' would be
inappropriate. The parenthetical phrase is needed so that the readers will
know exactly which term is being referenced.
LIST (command)
LIST (text tag)"
The problem is, I want to direct the reader to all the entries for
"perspective" rather than point them to just one. With just the two
entries, I would do this:
experience vs. concept
See perspective, linear; perspective, multiple-station-point
But I suspect I'm going to have a lot of entries that start with
"perspective." So I'd be interested in what you think.
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: Wed, 28 May 1997 16:28:45 -0400
Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group <INDEX-L@BINGVMB.CC.BINGHAMTON.EDU>
From: Barbara Cohen <BECohen653@AOL.COM>
Subject: Foreign terms
Dear Index-Lers:
I haven't exactly hit a wall today, but I have stumbled across a problem in
my current project that I'd like to air for discussion.
I have a question about the treatment of foreign terms in a book written in
English:
I am indexing a book with many Hebrew terms used both in transliteration and
in translation, and I find myself creating main entries for the terms based
primarily on the author's use of the terms.
Where the term is used consistently in the text in transliteration, I find
myself creating the index entry with the italicized word followed by a
parenthetic translation, if one is given in the text. (Double-posting if
necessary.)
When the author uses an English word in the text, especially where the
English term covers one or more Hebrew terms or where the translation is not
equivalent (so the author choses the English term we will understand, but
indicates the Hebrew equivalents), I find myself using the English term as a
main entry, sometimes with one or more Hebrew terms parenthetically...
(Double-posting only where actual Hebrew equivalents exist.)
I am neither inclined to slavishly double-post every entry nor to convert
every entry to "Hebrew transliteration (English)" or "English (Hebrew)"
format for the sake of consistency... I have been double-posting the
important terms for which equivalents in either language make sense as terms
to be looked up in the index (a judgment call if ever there was one). But
sometimes the foreign language term is used precisely because no adequate
English equivalent exists (or there is some discussion of the correct
equivalent--often alluded to in the voluminous notes to this sort of text).
I have had this happen in other books with foreign language terms (I am
thinking of some books on Buddhism that I've indexed, in which the
English-language "equivalents" are not used precisely because they are not
really equivalent terms....) and I am wondering if there is a good rule of
thumb someone has devised to help clarify the judgments I am making.
In looking over my draft index, I am thinking that it looks as though I have
been inconsistent, when in fact I have been adhering as much as common sense
and indexing experience allows to the author's nuanced use of terms.
I've been trying to be sensitive to the author's specific vocabulary rather
than imposing a slavish but perhaps not useful consistency. I have been
justifying this as sensitive indexing, but it occurrs to me that this could
be construed as my not knowing how to index (a la the discussions here of
looking at other people's indexes and passing judgment)!
So, what do other indexers do about this? (Most of the rules I see about this
sort of thing don't seem to take into account the kind of nuanced language
that the books I work on abound in.)
(Some days I long for books with good old plain English and clear subject
sentences in every paragraph....)
Barbara