From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 6-JUN-1995 15:08:23.89 To: CIRJA02 CC: Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9504B" Date: Tue, 6 Jun 1995 15:09:31 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9504B" To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:10:41 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lynn Moncrief Subject: Re: Duplicated locators ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I agree with Lys Ann Shore's response to Dave Strickler's question and add that your publisher may have specific guidelines on the subject. For example, I've indexed books for a publisher who wanted me to index the illustrations. However, they did not want duplicate locators for illustrations falling on the same page as the relevant text, italics, or anything else indicating that the entry referred to an illustration. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:11:02 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: HairyLarry@aol.com Subject: Re: Query about copyright of indexes ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Copyright question comes down to legal technicality of "work for hire." This is the only way that written material is copyrighted to anyone other than the creator. It is always specified in contracts presented by clients. That means they own the copyright, not the indexer. I think this should change, by the way, but it would require united action by most indexers in refusing to accept such clauses. Larry Harrison Hairylarry@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:11:37 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Barbara E. Cohen" Subject: Re: authors who invent new terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Newtersm are a problem in many fields. I index a newsletter for the National Center for Supercomputing Applications, and just last year the terminology for vectorized, parallel, and scalar processing underwent some major changes between the first and last issues of the newsletter, which left me grappling with the terminology issue at the end of the year. Likewise updated hardware that was announced in one issue but never materialized...this was a "political" issue and had to be indexed diplomatically. I advise extensive consultation with a client to resolve these issues, as there are no simple answers. Barbara E. Cohen becohen@prairienet.org ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:12:01 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Bob Zolnerzak Subject: Re: Indexing and computers In-Reply-To: ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On Fri, 7 Apr 1995 Mrowland@aol.com wrote: > ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- > As an book indexer who began with index cards long, long ago, I know that > there are many advantages to indexing by computer. It makes the work easier, > faster, and *somewhat* less stressful, and indexing programs give you the > tools to more easily create better indexes and to edit and revise indexes. > But I wonder--has the quality of book indexing improved over the last 10 > years or so? Is there any connection between the use of computers and the > been affected, or is the cost of the computer(s) balanced by the time > savings? I'm inclined to think that "indexing quality" depends ONLY on the amount of time and money the publisher of the book is willing (though the author usually pays for it) to spend for the index. Computers allowed authors who THOUGHT they knew how to index produce awful indexes, so the quality HAS gone down. My first ($10,000 in 1982) computer paid for itself in the first two years, and I continued using it (at a profit) until 1991. My second-generation ($3500 in 1991) computer paid for itself in about 6 months, and is still going strong. Bob ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:12:16 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Susan Healy Subject: Re: authors who invent new terms In-Reply-To: <199504062313.TAA14496@freenet3.scri.fsu.edu> ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Maryann, We frequently deal with the same situation in the Florida Statutes index. For example, the term "vocational education" was recently changed in the statutes to "career education." Since all statutory references were changed, we simply made a new main heading "Career education," moved references from the old heading "Vocational education," made new cross-references "Career education, See CAREER EDUCATION," and amended the old vocational education cross-references to read "Vocational education, See CAREER EDUCATION." The old "Vocational education" main heading became a cross-reference to the new location. The same plan is used for the literally dozens of similar changes in terminology we deal with after each session. Our index, like yours, is a subject index and the subject reference is still valid. We use a different scheme for changes of names of government entities or transfers of administration from one entity to another. For example, our Department of Environmental Regulation and Department of Natural Resources were recently abolished and their functions were merged into a single new agency, the Department of Environmental Protection. In this case we did not continue to use the old department names as main headings and all appropriate cross-references to the old departments were changed to references to the newly created department name. We do separately publish a digest of general laws each year and one of the larger headings in this digest is "Governmental reorganization." Changes in program names, transfers of administration, and abolishment of agencies or programs are indexed at that heading putting users on notice to the change. Some massaging of the entries must take place when changes in statutory language are not uniform throughout the code or where only portions of a program or an agency's mission are renamed or transferred elsewhere. These are the actions that make me pull my hair out trying to understand what goes, what stays. Continuously updated statutes indexes are just big jigsaw puzzles! Susan Healy Leg. Analyst Florida. Division. of Statutory Revision On Thu, 6 Apr 1995 maryann@mnrosdp.revisor.leg.state.mn.us wrote: > ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- > -------- > I'd like to ask about a problem that may only come up in legal indexing, > but in case anyone else has seen it, here goes: > > At times, our legislators decide that they're going to declare policy by > changing the name of a specific program, system, or body of law. Last > year, in their wisdom, they told us to change the words "unemployment > insurance" to "reemployment insurance" throughout the statutes. > > As indexers, how do you react to this? Do you put the main development > under the new term because that's what's in the text, and cross reference > from the old term, using it as a SEE reference? Or do you reason that > everybody will still look under the old term and will be annoyed at having > to look elsewhere? How do you treat the concept at the subheading level? > Would you consider it necessary to use internal cross-references from > one term to the other under every main heading where the concept appear > as a subheading? > > This is one of those times when I agree with Dickens' Mr. Micawber about > what the law is! > > Maryann Corbett > maryann.corbett@revisor.leg.state.mn.us > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:12:31 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Shore Editorial Services Subject: Re: authors who invent new terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Regarding Maryann Corbett's query about legislators switching terms: I'd put tjhe entry under whatever term is actually used in the text, with a "see" reference under the term that people will actually look for: e.g., "unemployment insurance. See reemployment insurance." Hopefully people's annoyance will be correctly targeted against the legislators--not against the hapless indexer who is, after all, bound by the terms the author actually uses. Lys Ann Shore Shore Editorial Services Lshore@paladin.iusb.indiana.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:12:49 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lori Lathrop <76620.456@compuserve.com> Subject: ASI Colorado Chapter Meeting ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- American Society of Indexers - Colorado Area Chapter Meeting - Election of officers and indexing workshop DATE: April 29, 1995 TIME: Noon PLACE: Longmont Public Library Meeting Room B Fourth Avenue between Kimbark and Emery, 2 blocks east of Main Street (US 287), 1 block north of CO 119 Entrances on Kimbark and Emery NOTE: Bring a sack lunch and beverage We will have a short meeting at 12:45 pm to elect officers for next year. Immediately following will be the indexing workshop. The workshop will be an informal comparison of the indexes we have prepared before the meeting. To participate, please obtain a copy pf "After centuries of Japanese isolation, a fateful meeting of East and West," by James Fallows, Smithsonian Magazine, July 1994, vol.25, no.4, and prepare an index beforehand. The article is available and can be copied at libraries. This exercise will not provide a critique of our indexes. It is simply a chance to compare our indexes informally and ask questions of each other regarding the use of entries, subentries, cross references, word order (in short, any aspect about which we have had to make choices). Bring only your own copy of the index; we will talk from our own copies rather than pass them around. No two of our indexes will be alike because we have each had experience either as new indexers fresh from practicing on course work or as experienced indexers who work on different types of material. In this informal atmosphere and with the variety of our backgrounds, we can learn a great deal from each other. If you have questions about this exercise, please call Ingrid Becher at (303)449-1188. *** Lori Lathrop ----------> INTERNET:76620.456@compuserve.com Lathrop Media Services, P.O. Box 808, Georgetown, CO 80444 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:13:29 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Efthimis N. Efthimiadis" Subject: SIGIR-95: Revised Prelim. Program ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- revised April 3, 1995 --------------------------------------- SIGIR '95 18th International Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval --------------------------------------- PRELIMINARY PROGRAM Seattle, WA, USA July 9 - July 13, 1995 Sponsored by ACM SIGIR in cooperation with DD (Denmark) CEPIS-EIRSG (Europe) GI (Germany) AICA-GLIR (Italy) IPSJ (Japan) BCS-IRSG (UK) ------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: What follows is an abbreviated version of the conference program and registration information. FULL information, including descriptions of tutorials and workshops and all technical sessions, is available via anonymous ftp from: ftp.u.washington.edu (\public\sigir95\program) or via WWW at URL: http://info.sigir.acm.org/sigir/conferences/ SIGIR_95_adv.pgm.txt; or contact sigir95@u.washington.edu to request a copy of the program by mail. -------------------------------------------------------------- SIGIR'95 is an international research conference on information retrieval theory, systems, practice and applications. IR groups within the computing societies of Denmark, Europe, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom are cooperating sponsors. The conference will be valuable to those interested in the theory of information retrieval as well as those responsible for system design, testing and evaluation. Topics include distributed IR and the Internet, efficiency techniques, text summarization, natural language processing, fusion strategies, user studies, search interfaces, and education in IR. Attendees will learn about the underlying foundations for the emerging Global Information Infrastructure, which depends upon searching, browsing, publishing, indexing and other processing of text and multimedia information collections. Six pre-conference tutorials will cover both beginning and advanced topics. The main program consists of 40 contributed papers as well as two panel discussions, poster sessions, and demonstrations. The conference will be followed by five post-conference research workshops on topics of great current and general interest: visual information retrieval interfaces; Z39.50; IR and databases; curriculum development for IR; and automatic construction of hypermedia. ---------------------------------------- SIGIR'95 PROGRAM SYNOPSIS ---------------------------------------- SATURDAY July 8 A tour to Mount Rainier SUNDAY July 9 Tutorials: Introduction to Information Retrieval (Peter Willett and Peter Ingwersen) Query-Document Symmetry and Duality (Stephen Robertson) What Differences Are Significant? Statistical Analysis of IR Tests (Jean Tague-Sutcliffe, James Blustein, Paul Kantor) Evaluation of IR Systems (William Hersh, Micheline Hancock-Beaulieu) Designing Information for the Computer Screen (Paul Kahn) Data Fusion in IR (Paul Kantor) Welcome reception MONDAY July 10 Newcomers breakfast Opening session (Chair: Raya Fidel) Opening remarks: Edward Fox Keynote address: Terry Winograd Six sessions of contributed papers: Distributed IR and the Internet (Chair: Paul Lindner) Efficiency Techniques (Chair: Peter Willett) Advanced Systems (Chair: IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg) Text Summarization (Chair: Karen Sparck-Jones) Integrating Structured and Unstructured Information (Chair: E. J. Yannakoudakis) Natural Language Processing (Chair: Haruo Kimoto) Poster session and demonstrations Evening reception TUESDAY July 11 Keynote address: Tefko Saracevic Panel session: Funding for IR Research (Chair: Efthimis Efthimiadis) Five sessions of contributed papers User Studies (Chair: Phil Smith) Fusion Strategies (Chair: Richard Tong) Search Interfaces (Chair: Maristella Agosti) Cognition and Association (Chair: Rik Belew) Automatic Classification (Chair: Ray Larson) Banquet at Microsoft campus WEDNESDAY July 12 Panel session: Education for IR (Chair: Kazem Taghva) Four sessions of contributed papers Text Categorization (Chair: Elizabeth D. Liddy) Retrieval Logic (Chair: Fabrizio Sebastiani) Term Statistics (Chair: Donna Harman) Feedback Methods (Chair: Howard Turtle) ACM Sigir Annual General Meeting A tour and dinner at Tillicum Village THURSDAY July 13 Post-conference research workshops: VIRI: Visual Information Retrieval Interfaces Z39.50 and the IR Research Community Information Retrieval and Databases Curriculum Development in Computer Information Science IR and Automatic Construction of Hypermedia A tour to the University of Washington FRIDAY July 14 A tour to Victoria, British Columbia, Canada -------------------------------------- CONFERENCE ORGANIZATION --------------------------------------- Conference Chair: Raya Fidel Graduate School of Library and Information Science, FM-30, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. Program Chairs: (N and S America, Asia): Edward A. Fox Department of Computer Science, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0106, USA. (Europe, Africa, Australia): Peter Ingwersen Royal School of Librarianship, Birketinget 6, DK 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark. --------------------------------------- SIGIR'95 IN SEATTLE --------------------------------------- CONFERENCE HOTEL All sessions will be held at the Seattle Sheraton Hotel & Towers, 1400 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101. The hotel offered a special conference rate: Single occupancy $119.00 Double occupancy $139.00 Additional person $ 25.00 Room tax is 15.2% Reservations can be made by calling 1-800-204-6100 (or 1-206-621-9000) within the U.S., or by faxing a request for reservation to 1-206-621-8441. Reservation should be made by June 17 for the ACM/SIGIR'95 group rate. Reservations made after the deadline are subject to availability and may be billed at a higher rate. Cancellations made less than 48 hours prior to arrival will incur a charge for one night's lodging. Reservations need to be guaranteed by sending a first night's deposit or by a credit card. AIR TRAVEL TO SEATTLE Seattle-Tacoma International Airport is served by most major international airlines. Bus transportation and taxi service from the airport to the Seattle Sheraton are readily available. SIGIR'95 has secured a special discount agreement with United Airlines unavailable to the general public. An additional 5% discount off the lowest applicable fare for domestic flights will be offered when you or your travel agent call 1-800-521-4041 and refer to the Meeting ID Number 590TR. A 10% discount off the unrestricted mid-week coach fares is available when purchased 7 days in advance. The same discounts apply on "Shuttle by United." Reservations clerks are on duty 7 days a week, 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. EST. These convention discounts are valid between July 6 and July 16, 1995. GROUND TRANSPORTATION FROM SEATTLE-TACOMA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Readily available taxi service to the Seattle Sheraton costs approximately $30.00. Gray Line Airport shuttle costs $7.00 one way and $12.00 round-trip. The shuttle departs from the north and south end of the Baggage Claim level, approximately every 15 minutes, from 5:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight daily. --------------------------------------- SIGIR'95 REGISTRATION INFORMATION --------------------------------------- REGISTRATION FEES Conference Before May 29 After May 29 ACM or SIGIR Members $275.00 $325.00 Non Members (*) $330.00 $380.00 Full Time Student $110.00 $150.00 One Day Registration $125.00 $150.00 ___________________________________________________________ Tutorials ACM Members One tutorial $150.00 $225.00 Two tutorials $250.00 $440.00 Non Members One tutorial $200.00 $275.00 Two Tutorials $350.00 $500.00 Full Time Student One tutorial $100.00 $150.00 Two tutorials $150.00 $250.00 ____________________________________________________________ Workshops $ 45.00 $ 55.00 ____________________________________________________________ Additional Banquet Ticket $ 50.00 $ 50.00 ____________________________________________________________ Student Banquet Ticket $ 25.00 $ 25.00 ____________________________________________________________ Mount Rainier Tour $ 48.00 $ 48.00 ____________________________________________________________ Tillicum Village Tour and Dinner $ 52.00 $ 52.00 ____________________________________________________________ Victoria, BC Tour $ 98.00 $ 98.00 ____________________________________________________________ (*) You may join ACM and/or SIGIR now and receive the member registration rate. This will reduce your registration fee and make you a member for a year. Just add in the appropriate membership dues on the SIGIR'95 Registration Form _____________________________________________________________ Membership Dues ACM members: To add SIGIR to membership $ 20.00 Non members: To join ACM only (as an associate member) $ 82.00 To join SIGIR only $ 65.00 To join both ACM and SIGIR $102.00 Students: To join ACM only $ 25.00 To join both ACM and SIGIR $ 35.00 REGISTRATION INFORMATION -- Full Conference Registration (ACM Members, SIGIR members or Non Members) includes attendance at all technical sessions, proceedings, conference banquet, lunch at the SIGIR Annual General Meeting, and two receptions. Student registration does not include the conference banquet. Additional banquet tickets are available for $50.00. A limited number of banquet tickets are available to full-time student attendees for $25.00. Additional copies of the proceedings and the tutorial notes will be on sale at the conference. -- Conference registration does not include tours. -- Conference registration does not include participation in tutorials or workshops. -- The ACM member rate is available to members of ACM, SIGIR, and the European and Japanese co-operating societies. The student rate is available to full-time students only. -- All payments must be made in U.S. funds or charged to Visa, MasterCard or American Express. -- No refunds for cancellations after June 9. A $25.00 handling fee will be charged for cancellations received before June 9. -- Hotel reservations should be made directly with the Seattle Sheraton Hotel & Towers. Details are provided above. Cut here: _____________________________________________________________ --------------------------------------- SIGIR'95 REGISTRATION FORM --------------------------------------- 18TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT IN INFORMATION RETRIEVAL Seattle, July 9 - July 13 Please use block letters or type, and tick where appropriate __ Mr. __ Ms. __ Dr. __ Prof. Other: ______ LAST NAME:________________ FIRST NAME:_______________________ BADGE NAME (if different): __________________________________ COMPANY/ORGANIZATION:________________________________________ ADDRESS:_____________________________________________________ CITY:__________________ STATE:______ ZIP CODE: __________ COUNTRY:_______________ PHONE: ( ___ )____________________ FAX: ( ___ ) _______________ EMAIL: ________________________ __ Check if this will be your first SIGIR conference CONFERENCE REGISTRATION: FEES: __ ACM Member __ Nonmember __ Student __ One Day Registration: M T W (please circle one) REGISTRATION: $ ________________ Membership: __ ACM __ SIGIR MEMBERSHIP: $_________________ Tutorials: AM: __ Intro __ Query __ Statistics PM: __ Eval __ Design __ Fusion TUTORIALS: $ ________________ Workshops: __ VIRI __ Z39.50 __ IR & DB __ Curriculum __ Hypermedia WORKSHOPS: $ ________________ Special Events: Additional banquet tickets (how many): ___ For (Names): ________________________ BANQUET: $ _______________ Mount Rainier Tour (how many):___ Tillicum Village Tour (how many): ___ Victoria, BC Tour (how many): ___ TOURS: $_________________ TOTAL $ ________________ DO YOU HAVE ANY SPECIAL NEEDS? Please explain: ___________________________________________________________ METHOD OF PAYMENT (US Currency only): __ Check payable to ACM/SIGIR95 __ Credit card (Visa, MC, AMEX) ____________________________________ Credit card number, expiration date ______________________________________ Signature, date (I authorize to charge my account fees indicated above) Return Registration Form by May 29 to qualify for early registration. Use fax or email (credit card payment) or mail (check or credit card) to: SIGIR95 c/o Convention Services Northwest 1809 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1414 Seattle, WA 98101 USA Fax: +1 206-292-0559 Email: SIGIR95@aol.com Registration queries to: +1 206-292-9198 (Ask for Sarah Amendola) ______________________________________________________________ Efthimis N. Efthimiadis Assistant Professor Department of Library and Information Science Graduate School of Education & Information Studies University of California at Los Angeles 241 GSE&IS Building, 152003 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1520 tel: 310-825-8975; fax: 310-206-4460; email: efthimis@gslis.ucla.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:13:43 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@aol.com Subject: Re: authors who invent new terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hi Maryann! I've come upont his problem often, as well. I've gone with both terms, that is, putting as much of the entries under the laws as they were described literally, with cross-references from the old term to the new term to guide readers. unemployment laws would go under unemployment, as long as that term was used. and once the "new" term is used, I would then put further entries under "reemployment". and a cross-reference from unemployment to reeemployment, as well as as from employment to both unemployment and reemployment. gets kinda crazy, but then that reflects the minds of the legislators, too ;-) now, I also like Janet's idea--if there is a *lot* of stuff on employment-related issues, listing the unemployment and reemployment items under Employment might also benefit the reader. sounds like the sort of mental challenge that makes indexing really fun. good luck! ttfn, Pilar Wyman Indexing Annapolis, MD email: PilarW@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:14:14 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Linda_Robinson@oclc.org Subject: getting a foot in the door ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Message: Once I've completed the USDA course, my skills will be ready to use. but, HOW does one get a foot in the door? I've heard a few suggestions such as finding a book that doesn't have an index or a poor index, then re-indexing it and sending it to the publisher in hopes they need one. But what are other ways? Thanks. Linda Robinson, Access Services Specialist Internet: linda_robinson@oclc.org FAX:(614) 793-8707 Voice:(800) 848-5878 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:14:37 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kris Van Dellen {x65392 CF/DEV} Subject: WI Chapter of ASI? ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Good Morning, I'm wondering if an ASI Chapter exists in WI? Or, even better, in the Eau Claire area of the state. If so, whom should I contact? If you are not aware of one but are interested -- please write to me. Perhaps we should consider gathering (electronically or in person) to discuss indexing issues. Thanks much to the St. Paul, MN chapter for welcoming us WI folk, it's so great to meet with you that I'm feeling inspired to seek such a gathering in our region. Kristine Van Dellen email: libr@cray.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:14:55 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: IRCINDEX@aol.com Subject: Re: Have you ever wished for your own programmer? ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Thank you for all your kind words about CINDEX. We do appreciate it! Frances S. Lennie Indexing Research ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Apr 1995 15:15:14 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: authors who invent new terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >As indexers, how do you react to this? Do you put the main development >under the new term because that's what's in the text, and cross reference >from the old term, using it as a SEE reference? Or do you reason that >everybody will still look under the old term and will be annoyed at having >to look elsewhere? How do you treat the concept at the subheading level? >Would you consider it necessary to use internal cross-references from >one term to the other under every main heading where the concept appear I would list it under the new term and have a "see" reference from the old term. Yes, people will look under the old term, but then they'll immediately find out what the new term is, and isn't that the function of the "see" reference? The only people who'll be annoyed are the ones who are *always* annoyed at finding a "see" reference, but that doesn't mean we should stop using 'em. Everybody else is just going to have an "oh" reaction. If you have new terms that are going to have only a few locators, then you can double-post instead. In the subentries, I would use the new term. My guess is that when people use the subentries, they're looking for something that *means* something close to what they want; they're not necessarily looking for an exact phrase match. When they see "reemployment insurance" and don't see "unemployment insurance," they'll catch on to the doublespeak right away. Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | Life is good. Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | Milwaukee, WI | ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 14:19:05 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: maryann@mnrosdp.revisor.leg.state.mn.us Subject: Re: WI Chapter of ASI? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 10 Apr 95 15:14:37 +0700." ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Kris Van Dellen writes: >I'm wondering if an ASI Chapter exists in WI? Or, even better, >in the Eau Claire area of the state. If so, whom should I contact? (snip) By my informal count, there are about seven ASI members who live in WI. and who choose membership in the Twin Cities chapter. Other chapter officers may report that there are more WI members than I know about. I think a WI organization would be a good idea, since Madison has a library school that could help with programs. Contact really helps. Maybe it's time for us to find out who is really near whom and contact them to encourage them to organize! If you would like to be that activist about it, send me e-mail at home via my husband's account (corbett@math.umn.edu) and I will send you a list of names, etc. Cheers, Maryann Corbett ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 14:23:45 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Isawriter@aol.com Subject: Cross References ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- A tech writer acquaintance indexes her own books. She posed the following question: >>What is the current thinking about cross references, specifically, synonyms? If the program I am documenting uses the term delete, but I think users may look up erase or remove, how do you index those synonyms. Do you put See Delete or do you just list the page number for where delete appears? I've read that you should put the cross reference to the term your system uses so that the user learns the terminology. I also had a client question why I had a direct page reference from remove when that term did not appear in the manual (we used delete). But, I was involved in a thread on CompuServe where I explained the reason for cross reference (the user learns the program's terminology and knows what word to look for on the page), but I got blasted by others (they were all computer consultants) about how annoying cross references are. Hence my dilemma on my current project and my interest in your thoughts and the current thinking of the professional indexing association.<< I suggested not worrying about people who don't like cross references, but said I would post this on INDEX-L. Anyone care to comment? Craig Brown St. Peters, MO ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:28:51 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jack Shaw Subject: HTML info sources -- cheap seats ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- For those without the bells and whistles of mosaic, etc., the "Beginner's Guide to HTML", published by the folks at NCSA, is available online in either text or postscript versions via ftp from either: ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu --or: ftp.ifi.uio.no ...archives by rummaging a bit. It's an emminently readable 14-page (p'script) doc. that wraps up with references for further reading--all available on line, as well. Jack Shaw jsh@software-ag.de ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:29:12 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@aol.com Subject: Re: authors who invent new terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- This discussion has been quite intriguing. I think I can "summarize" the responses given to Maryann on this problem: 1)post all entries under the new term, and cross-reference from the old term to the new term 2)double-post, or post some under the old and some under the new, and/or post all entries under some sort of global main heading, all with appropriate cross-references to guide readers 3)consult with the client Personally, I think I like #3 best of all --thanks Barbara!--but it also seems like the solution to this problem may have to do with the index context. For example, if we're talking about a master index, then I would definitely go with 1. If we're talking about a series of periodical indexes, then I might be inclined to double-post (2) for the index with the first occurrence of the new term, and then switch to 1 for future indexes. If we're talking about an index for a text with multi-authors, then I might go for 2 (or any case where the "new" term is not used consistently). Whatever the case, I think consulting with the client to confirm the modus operandi is appropriate. I realize these cases may not match the one Maryann presented (legal statutes?), which I'm not specifically familiar with, but this is certainly a problem common to indexing (as when a person or company changes their name, or when a drug gets reclassified). Pilar Wyman Wyman Indexing email: PilarW@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:29:28 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Arline P. Dell (202) 395-3878" Subject: Re: authors who invent new terms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- i index a budget volume for the us government and we generally in a reorganization list the old name and the new name of the entity. is there any hard and fast rules on this. since i am new to indexing and have only revised this one index i am most interested in hearing from people who index "government" volumes...ones that need to respond to the politics as well as the actual realities of government. i also would like to know if there are any hard and fast rules governing the use of See and See also..... any help that you could offer would be greatly appreciated. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:29:46 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Julius Ariail Subject: Re: getting a foot in the door ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >Message: >Once I've completed the USDA course, my skills will be ready to use. >but, HOW does one get a foot in the door? I've heard a few >suggestions such as finding a book that doesn't have an index or a >poor index, then re-indexing it and sending it to the publisher in >hopes they need one. But what are other ways? Thanks. > Linda Robinson, Access Services Specialist > Internet: linda_robinson@oclc.org Linda, from your return address I would suspect you're working in an well-known (to librarians, anyway) international organization that has shelves and shelves of manuals, technical reports, newsletters, etc. that are marginally indexed if at all. Plus OCLC is a customer of other automation software/communication/computer hardware companies that have poorly indexed manuals, technical reports, etc. OCLC is also engaged in the project to use traditional automated cataloging record forms to "index the Internet" by making a master catalog of Internet resources that could be loaded in or referenced by our local online catalog systems. Those would be three nearby opportunities to use your new skills through local projects that could lead to bigger and better opportunities later. The library automation system in use in my university library works well, but its weakest point (as the company would admit) is the technical documentation, including the indexing for that documentation. Some documents are printed, some are online, some are in message files. Bringing all that together in a master index would be a wonderful project. Doing even part of that indexing (perhaps the acquisitions/serials control programs) would earn someone coast-to-coast gratitude. Actually, since the company has customers in Australia and New Zealand, maybe ocean-to-ocean gratitude. You get the picture. Julius - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Julius Ariail, University Librarian jariail@gasou.edu or Box 8074 Georgia Southern University jariail@gsaix2.cc.gasou.edu Statesboro, GA 30460 USA Voice 912 681-5115 Fax -0093 "We have no large libraries or small libraries now. There are only larger, or smaller, library networks. Tell me about your network." ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:30:00 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kay Crissman Subject: Re: USDA indexing courses In-Reply-To: from "Automatic digest processor" at Apr 5, 95 00:03:17 am ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- > Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 14:45:26 ECT > From: Will Hires > Subject: Re: USDA Corr. Courses-Indexing > > Could you provide the rest of us the basic info about these courses? > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 1995 10:24:07 ECT Becky Walton said: > > [Moderator's note: I sent Becky the basic info about this course (address, > > and cost...Others may want to comment on length and quality] > > > > [Sorry, I should know better....here 'tis...Charlotte] > > > Graduate School of the USDA > Correspondence Programs, Ag Box 9911 > Room 1114, South Agriculture Building > 14th St. and Independence Ave. SW > Washington, DC 20250 > (202) 720-7123 > TDD: (202) 690-1516 > Tuition: (includes all materials) > $281.00--Basic Indexing (beginning) > $275.00--Applied Indexing (more advanced) > > .... Stuff deleted > Peg Mauer and RachelR replied that they were taking the courses and were > very satisfied with it. I hope this response comes out the way I want it too - I am working with a very clunky editor so if I have included the entire days digest please forgive me. My question about the USDA courses is this - has anyone been able to successfully start free lance indexing after taking one of these courses. This seems pretty interesting and I have a copy of their course catalogue. However, I would like to know before I invest time and money into it if there is anyone who has found this a successful way to start indexing. Thanks Kay Crissman kay.crissman@launchpad.unc.edu or 73324.2273@compuserve.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:30:12 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lori Lathrop <76620.456@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: Cross References ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Craig -- I am a technical writer and professional indexer. Also, I deliver a two-day workshop, Indexing Skills for Technical Communicators, to client sites throughout the U.S. In answer to your question about cross-references, it's true that most readers resent being bounced around the index. However, it's also true that readers resent *not* being able to find an entry for a term they're looking for in the index; in fact, that's far worse when readers *know* the information is in the text somewhere and, consequently, they may lose faith in both the product and the documentation if they don't find a particular term. So ... *See* references do serve a useful purpose when they direct readers from a term that is *not* used to a term that *is* used in the document. Now ... about your examples ... *erase*, *remove*, and *delete* are verbs, not nouns. Index entries should be in noun form. Gerunds (words ending in *ing*) are also nouns. So ... you might want to create an entry such as "deleting files" and, if *deleting* is the preferred term, you might also want to create: erasing files. *See* deleting files or removing files. *See* deleting files Of course, if the entry "deleting files" has just a couple of page references and no subentries, it would be better to double post rather than to use the *See* reference. In other words, use *See* references only when the cross-referenced entry contains several subentries; if there are only a couple of page refs, include them under each synonym. Hope this answers your questions .... Lori *********************************************************************** Lori Lathrop ----------> INTERNET:76620.456@compuserve.com Lathrop Media Services, P.O. Box 3065, Idaho Springs, CO 80452 Office: 303-567-4011 *********************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:30:30 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Georgianna Subject: Re: WI Chapter of ASI? In-Reply-To: Message of Tue, 11 Apr 1995 14:19:05 ECT from ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Not to put too fine a point on it, the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee also has a library school where indexing is taught - Madison isn't alone in Wisconsin. The teacher there is Virgil Diodato, a professional indexer who really knows his stuff and loves to share indexing with students. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:30:44 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Re: Cross References In-Reply-To: <9504112329.AA03937@core.symnet.net> ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On Tue, 11 Apr 1995 Isawriter@aol.com wrote: > A tech writer acquaintance indexes her own books. She posed the following > question: > > >>What is the current thinking about cross references, specifically, > synonyms? If the program I am documenting uses the term delete, but I think > users may look up erase or remove, how do you index those synonyms. Do you > put See Delete or do > you just list the page number for where delete appears? I'd make the following cross-references: erase. _See_ delete remove. _See_ delete If, however, there are only a couple of page references involved, I'd double-post under "delete," "erase," and "remove." (I assume there'll be quite a few page references, so there may well be no need to double-post.) Your friend also has to ask herself who her audience is. If this manual is strictly for computer guru types, maybe they won't need to look under "erase," "remove," and any other synonyms you can come up with. But if this manual is for your ordinary, everyday, non-computer-guru type of person, then the more synonyms, the better. I've been using a computer for ten years now. I've used lots of different kinds of software packages. But the manuals that come with software and hardware drive me CRAZY!! I can NEVER find the terms I'm looking for in the index. Or else the index is so sketchy that it's of next to no use to me. Case in point: I have a fax/modem in my computer. I wanted to send a fax. Silly me: I looked in the index to find out how to do so. No help whatsoever. In total desperation, I checked the table of contents. No help. I started skimming through the entire manual. (You can TELL I was desperate.) I finally found the information I needed in, of all places, an appendix--and the appendixes hadn't been indexed! Arrrgggggghhhhhhh! > but I got blasted by others (they were all > computer consultants) about how annoying cross references are. Perhaps the cross-references were annoying to them because they know the subject so well. But again, we average folk LIKE cross-references, both the _See_ and the _See also_ variety. Terminology varies from book to book and author to author. There's no way to know what a term is called in the book you've got in front of you. I index a lot of legal materials. You'd think, wouldn't you, that there'd be standardization of legal terms? But no! In some states, term X is indeed called X in the state statutes. But in another state's statutes, the very same term is called Y. (Maryann Corbett offered us an excellent example when she told us about Minnesota's interesting terminology change: "unemployment compensation" has become "reemployment compensation," as best as I can remember. I live in Florida, and if I looked up "reemployment" in the Florida Statutes index, I'd never find it.) > I suggested not worrying about people who don't like cross references Hear, hear! B-) Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "The old he-coon walks just before the light of day." --Governor Lawton Chiles of Florida ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:31:42 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Dwight Walker Subject: Order form for Aust Soc of Indexers Int'l conference proceeding ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >INDEXERS - PARTNERS IN PUBLISHING > >PROCEEDINGS FROM THE FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE AVAILABLE JULY 1995 > >The first International conference of the Australian Society of Indexers was >a conference for the indexing professional and the wider publishing >community. Topics included: > >* Indexing from an international perspective >* The publisher's point of view >* Indexing and the computer >* Law Indexing >* The ethics of indexing >* .......and more > >The conference proceedings will be available in July 1995 and will contain >most of the papers from the conference as well as discussions and comments >from plenary sessions, workshops, and forums. > >ORDER NOW: - SPECIAL DISCOUNT FOR CONFERENCE DELEGATES AND MEMBERS OF THE >AUSTRALIAN SOCIETY OF INDEXERS. > >Price: $35.00 per copy > >Prepublication price $30.00 per copy >(order placed before 15 June 1995) > >Discounted price for conference delegates >and members of the Australian Society of Indexers $22.50 per copy > >To order, post order to >Conference Organiser >Australian Society of Indexers >GPO Box 1251 >Melbourne Vic 3001. >or >Fax to > 03 571 6341 >or >email to >findlay@acer.edu.au > >Major sponsor for conference - CINDEX, the Ultimate Software for >Professional Indexers >___________________________________________________________________ > >PURCHASE ORDER FORM > >INDEXERS - PARTNERS IN PUBLISHING First International Conference >Proceedings. > >Name: >............................................................................ >............................................................................ >.... > >Delivery Address: >............................................................................ >............................................................. > >City: >......................................................................... >Postal code ............................................... > >Number of copies .......................................... > >Please indicate if you are a conference delegate or a member of the >Australian Society of Indexers > >Prepayment if posting - Make cheques payable the Australian Society of >Indexers - Conference > >Return completed order form to Conference Organiser, G.P.O. Box 1251, >Melbourne Vic 3001 >or Fax to 03 571 6341 or email: findlay@acer.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------- Dwight Walker dwalker@zeta.org.au +61-2-3986726 (h) +61-2-4393750 (w) W-F http://www.zeta.org.au/~dwalker ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:32:05 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Barbara E. Cohen" Subject: Re: Cross References ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Craig: I would first try to see if I could get the editor to agree that cross-references are a good thing. In my experience, if you can win that battle, the editor will defend you to the rest of the people in-house. If that fails, my method has been to enter the synonym terms and cross-reference them to the relevant command. Computer people are so literal, they don't much care about how the rest of us flounder searching for the alpohabetization stuff that is under "sort" without any clue under "alphabetization." But stand your ground on the cross-references. Barbara E. Cohen becohen@prairienet.org ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:32:26 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lynn Moncrief Subject: Re: Cross References ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Craig, The question for the computer consultants who find cross-references annoying is, How annoyed are they when they can't find what they're looking for in the index because they didn't look for the term the indexer actually used? Cross-references may be annoying to some, but not as annoying as not being able to find the information at all. Are the "annoyed" consultants expressing a preference for double-posting? If so, you may want to tell them that often the indexer is working with a very limited amount of space allotted for the index. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs You wrote: > >----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >A tech writer acquaintance indexes her own books. She posed the following >question: > >>>What is the current thinking about cross references, specifically, >synonyms? If the program I am documenting uses the term delete, but I think >users may look up erase or remove, how do you index those synonyms. Do you >put See Delete or do >you just list the page number for where delete appears? > >I've read that you should put the cross reference to the term your system >uses so that the user learns the terminology. I also had a client question >why I had a direct page reference from remove when that term did not appear >in the manual (we used delete). > >But, I was involved in a thread on CompuServe where I explained the reason >for cross reference (the user learns the program's terminology and knows what >word to look for on the page), but I got blasted by others (they were all >computer consultants) about how annoying cross references are. > >Hence my dilemma on my current project and my interest in your thoughts and >the current thinking of the professional indexing association.<< > >I suggested not worrying about people who don't like cross references, but >said I would post this on INDEX-L. Anyone care to comment? > >Craig Brown >St. Peters, MO > ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:33:24 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Madelaine M. Weigel (UW-Platteville Library)" Subject: Re: WI Chapter of ASI? ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I am a relatively new ASI member. I live in Platteville, Wis. (the southwestern most corner of the state). I was under the impression that Wisconsin librarians hooked up with the "Great Lakes" division located in Illinois. Madelaine M. Weigel. Elton S. Karrmann Library. 1 University Plaza. Platteville, Wis. 53818 (USA) (608) 342-1643 email: WeigelM@uwplatt.edu ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 16:33:46 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Neva J. Smith" Subject: Re: Cross References In-Reply-To: <199504112231.RAA09371@zoom.bga.com> ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Craig, My preference in the case of only a few locators, is to enter under the synonym with the preferred term in parens. delete 5, 32-33, 94 erase (delete) 5, 32-33, 94 remove (delete) 5, 32-33, 94 This way the preferred term is available to the user. If there isn't room for double (triple) posting, use see refs. I would probably do it differently for works other than computer manuals and related materials. I'd double post under a likely synonym without parenthetical use of the preferred term. Or if there are too many page references, use the see cross ref. ttfn, Neva > = - * - = < = > = - * - = < = > = - * - = < = > = - * - = < = Neva J. Smith, MLIS DataSmiths Information Services PO Box 2157 / Round Rock, TX 78680 email: njsmith@bga.com voice: (512) 244-2767 Editor, _Library Currents_ PO Box 2199 / Round Rock, TX 78680 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 14:10:29 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@aol.com Subject: Re: USDA indexing courses ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Kay Crisman wrote: "My question about the USDA courses is this - has anyone been able to successfully start free lance indexing after taking one of these courses. This seems pretty interesting and I have a copy of their course catalogue. However, I would like to know before I invest time and money into it if there is anyone who has found this a successful way to start indexing." The courses are very good, and do discuss some business practices for indexers, such as contracts. What's more, you will be developing some sample indexes you can show to people who want to see your work. But you cannot rely on a course to do it all - you will need to understand running a small business, marketing, and some bookkeeping to get the business off the ground. One good source that discusses it in English is "Small Time Operator" put out by 10-Speed Press. But I got my business off the ground after taking the first USDA course - actually during the course, so yes, it was part of a successful way to start. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 14:10:50 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard Shrout, LIB, (202) 514-5102" Subject: Cross References ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- The rule is that a back-of-the-book index should use the terminology in the book. However, if the indexer knows or believes that the readers are very likely to look under another term, then that term should either be double-posted or used in a cross reference, See or See also depending upon the situation. I try to double post whenever I can; in other words, put the page numbers under both terms. There are situations which demand the use of cross references such as several synonymous terms, a long string of subheadings under one of the terms meaning that the index would increase substantially in length if all the page numbers were double-posted. I hope the above is of some help. I am certain that you will get several other responses. Richard Shrout richshr@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 14:11:35 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Barbara E. Cohen" Subject: Request for a reference ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I am looking to locate a copy of Frank Dunn, INDEXING YOUR LOCAL HISTORY, 1987, Sydney: Royal Australian Historical Society. This is an 8-page booklet. No American libraries have a copy, and I would like to see this (part of my research for my upcoming ASI paper on indexing regional history materials). If someone in Australia could interlibrary loan a copy to me or give me information about ordering a copy if it is still in print, I'd be forever grateful. Thanks. Barbara E. Cohen becohen@prairienet.org ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 14:11:56 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@aol.com Subject: Re: USDA indexing courses ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Kay, I know of quite a few indexers who learned the trade with the USDA course. Of course, it doesn't guarantee a client base. It's still up to you to do your networking, contacting, etc. Getting that first paid client is still up to you. But there are many working indexers who began with the course who are excellent indexers now. (I myself didn't take the course, but was taught in-house.) If you are interested in learning indexing, you will get plenty of hands on with the course, and personal critiques of your work. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing email: jperlman@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 14:12:17 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Re: USDA indexing courses In-Reply-To: <9504130520.AA29546@core.symnet.net> ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I wish I could answer Kay Crissman's question about the USDA indexing courses (How many people have gone into indexing after taking the USDA course?), but I don't know the answer. I'm one of the people who teaches Basic Indexing for the USDA. If you've got any questions for me, please send 'em to me at my e-mail address, and I'll try to answer 'em. Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "The old he-coon walks just before the light of day." --Governor Lawton Chiles of Florida ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 14:12:35 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: RachelR@aol.com Subject: Re: USDA indexing courses ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Kay wrote: >My question about the USDA courses is this - has anyone been able to >successfully start free lance indexing after taking one of these courses. >This seems pretty interesting and I have a copy of their course catalogue. >However, I would like to know before I invest time and money into it if >there is anyone who has found this a successful way to start indexing. Kay, I absolutely *can't* imagine having tried to pass myself off as an indexer without having taken the USDA course. I believe I would have made an utter fool of myself. I will still be a beginner after completing the course, but at least I will know enough to say so, to do a reasonable job, know when to ask for help (thank God for the Internet), and most important, know how to go about bidding for a job to begin with. I say do it. It won't be wasted time or money. RachelR ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 14:13:10 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: USDA Corr. Courses-Indexing ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >My question about the USDA courses is this - has anyone been able to >successfully start free lance indexing after taking one of these courses. Me. Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | Life is good. Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | Milwaukee, WI | ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 14:13:23 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: WI Chapter of ASI? ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >I was under the impression that Wisconsin librarians hooked up >with the "Great Lakes" division located in Illinois. I live in a suburb of Milwaukee, so I officially signed on with the Great Lakes chapter. Only I found out that nothing is happening with that chapter--no meetings scheduled. So you might be better off with the Twin Cities meetings if you can get to 'em. As for me, I'm hoping to meet a few more indexers here in Milwaukee and start having informal meetings. Any takers? Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | Life is good. Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | Milwaukee, WI | ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 14:14:40 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Charlotte Skuster Subject: Oops, lost a message Will the person who sent the posting about UT SLIS seminars please resubmit? I accidently deleted it. Sorry. Charlotte