========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 08:18:30 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: What to send prospective clients When I first went into business for myself, I thought about sending out a brochure. At that time, I was getting advice from the Small Business Development Center in St. Paul, Minnesota. (I highly recommend SBDCs. They're an arm of the Small Business Administration, they're usually housed at a college or university, the advisors are usually retired entrepreneurs, and the advice is FREE. The advisors are terrific, and they really know what they're talking about.) My business advisor thought that a brochure would be a waste of my money. He suggested that I simply send a cover letter, resume, and business card. And that's what I've done ever since. It's worked! I also include a list of my clients. I keep lists in my computer of (just about) every editing, indexing, proofreading, research, and writing project I've ever done. (Now, if that ain't anal retentive, I don't know *what* is.) If any prospective client would like to see one of those lists, I send it along. Sometimes prospective clients are interested in seeing a sample of my work. Obviously, I don't want to send along a book (if the publisher's sent me one; I always ask for a copy of the book, but unfortunately, some publishers don't supply them to the freelancer free of charge), so I'll make a copy of the index to several books. As to the list of projects and the samples of my work: I only send those if a client wants to see them. I have a sentence in my cover letter that runs something like this: "If there is any further information with which I can supply you, please let me know." That covers all these extras. I don't want to inundate prospective clients. If they want more info, they ask. Just my MO. Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "Shake and shake / The catsup bottle. / None will come, / And then a lot'll." --Richard Armour ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 09:31:27 EDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lori Lathrop <76620.456@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Re: Page Ranges in FrameMaker Grant -- Thanks so much for responding to my posting on INDEX-L. I don't think the tech writer who told me about this "bug" is malicious but, no doubt, he is confused. Anyway, thanks for verifying my "gut feeling" which told me that there is no such "bug." Lori Lathrop *********************************************************************** Lathrop Media Services ----------> INTERNET:76620.456@compuserve.com P.O. Box 3065, Idaho Springs, CO 80452 / 303-567-4011 or 303-567-9533 *********************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 09:01:00 CDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jane Matsoff Subject: New Indexers We document leasing/accounting software and have recently started indexing our manuals. We've read a couple of books and attended a couple of classes, but still need a lot of guidance. None of us are professional Indexers. So, if you have suggestions or opinions about the following issues please respond. We manually mark entries in our Microsoft Word 6.0 documents and then generate the index. Does anyone else use this feature in Word? Is there another package, (that works with Word) that you would recommend? So far we've marked entries at the bottom of the page rather than right after the word or phrase to index. This method allows us to read our text and make necessary changes, but it's easy to lose track of the entries if we make a big edit. Where do you recommend we mark our entries? How do you decide how heavily to index? We would like to make a guideline so that we all index similarly. (If you are familiar with the Information Mapping method, we write our documents according to that philosophy and in most cases index to the block level--or for each paragraph) We did make a couple of standards for our indexes already and plan to make some more. Do you have any ideas for standards? What works for you? When we edit each other's indexes, what should we look for other than repeated entries, spelling errors, and correct references? Are there other tips you can think of? Thank you so much for your time and advice. Jane Matsoff janem@decisionsys.com Decision Systems, Inc. Mpls., MN ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 10:04:50 EDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lori Lathrop <76620.456@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Translation Issues and Indexes I have a corporate client who markets globally. Since their product documentation is translated into many languages, I advised them that it would be better for them to submit the index to their translators as a separate file rather than as embedded tags that would generate the index. The main advantage, from a translation standpoint, is that the index could be translated more effectively that way because the translators would have the "whole picture." Any thoughts on this? If any of you develop indexes for product documentation that is translated into many languages, I'd like to hear about your approaches. Thanks in advance .... ****************************************************************** Lori Lathrop ----------> INTERNET:76620.456@compuserve.com Lathrop Media Services, P.O. Box 3065, Idaho Springs, CO 80452 Office: 303-567-4011 / Home: 303-567-9533 ****************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 15:01:46 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Jan C. Wright" Subject: ASI WEB PAGE has moved! Due to circumstances beyond our control, we have had to move the ASI web page to a new location. As of this morning, it is up and running in its new home, so please come and visit, and change your bookmarks! http://www.well.com/user/asi/ We want to thank the University of Missouri for providing us a home up until now, and wish them well. Our new home is on the WELL, where ASI's email account is established. Any questions or comments about anything not working should be sent to JanCW@aol.com or bero@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu. Come visit! Kari Bero and Jan Wright ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 15:17:46 EDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kay Crissman Subject: Is the time right to take the USDA course? (esp. after Money article) I have not read the Money article about indexing that everyone keeps referring to but from Hazel and Norma's comments it seems to have greatly increased the number of students taking the USDA Indexing course. Last spring I wrote asking about the USDA course and received much good advice. I have been looking forward to signing up for it but have only now budgeted enough money for it. Wouldn't you know now that I am ready that many other people are signing up. I am wondering if I should go ahead or wait another month or two when the demand for the course may not be so great. I think it will help me in my work and would hope that I will have an aptitude for indexing and of course would love to make $50,000 per year but don't expect to :) I addressed this to the list as a whole as I thought some other lurkers might have similar concerns. Kay Crissman Kay.crissman@launchpad.unc.edu ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 17:01:42 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kevin Subject: Machine indexing horror story I've been dying to show this to people who would appreciate it for a long time. The following section actually appears as is in the index to the manual that came with my internal faxmodem. The index is only 2 pages yet contains 4-5 more similar groups of terms, such as "AT command" with seven subheads and "AT commands" with another 5 subs. This is evidence of either a *really* bad indexer or machine indexing. I'm seeing lots of this type of thing in the Help files for Windows applications. Terms like Finding files, ... followed by Finding Files, ... Rockwell Protocol Interface compatible software, 27 Rockwell Protocol interface compatibel software, 14 Rockwell Protocol Interface (RPI), secape sequence support, 26 RPI compatible software, 14, 27 RPI (Rockwell Protocol Interface), 1 Those who support machine indexing are Darrowizing themselves, as I see it. "Darrowize": new word I made up. Refers to the Scopes monkey trial, in which Clarence Darrow, prevented from winning the case in a legal sense, (he actually technically lost the case), "won" in the public arena the only way possible: by so savagely and completely humiliating William Jennings Bryan intellectually that creationism was dealt a near death blow. Bryan was so *completely* humiliated intellectually that he died something like 48-72 hours after the close of the trial, and spent his last 2 days on a park bench babbling incoherently and staring into space. Kevin Mulrooney ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dyslexics of the world untie! First State Indexing (302) 738-2558 276 East Main Street Indexer@inetcom.net Newark, Delaware 19711 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 16:07:39 -0500 Reply-To: "Neva J. Smith" Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Neva J. Smith" Subject: Re: Translation Issues and Indexes In-Reply-To: <199509222038.PAA26956@zoom.bga.com> Lori, I agree that the index shouldn't be tanslated as embedded tags. Seeing the structure is important. I think it would help the translator get a feel for the complete concepts involved, whereas if terms were added as the tags were encountered, the translation may not cover the entire concept accurately. It works that way in English- note the number of indexers who have told us that they index in Cindex or Macrex first, then go back and put the tags in. I have to admit I haven't done this myself, though I did suggest it to a potential client (who wanted an indexer fluent in Spanish). 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: Fri, 22 Sep 1995 17:32:44 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Nancy Etheridge Subject: Re: indexing a journal not yet written In-Reply-To: <199509221942.PAA21088@freenet3.scri.fsu.edu> On Thu, 21 Sep 1995, Seth A. Maislin wrote: > There has been much talk recently about indexing journals. But what happens > if none of the issues is written yet? (snip) > 1) How often should one index a journal as it goes along? Once every x > number of years? Annually? Once every x issues? What should we base > our decision on? I suggest you plan to index annually. If the journal has 4 issues of about 300 pages, that is 1200 pages to index, more or less. How much less depends on advertising and whether such things as letters to the editor are indexed. Come to think of it, you might want to index advertisers, too. The frequency should be based on the subject matter: what is it and how "dense" is the material? Is this a specialized scholarly journal in a rapidly changing area (more frequent indexing may be needed, perhaps every issue) or a more eclectic work, such as "National Geographic" or "Smithsonian." How often are similar journals indexed? How detailed will the index be? Are you planning on simple alphabetical author, subject, and title lists or a more elaborate index? > 2) If an index is written every year, for example, what happens to the > Year-One index once it's time to write the Year-Two index? Do they get > combined? Is the Year-One index "thrown out"? Whether to cumulate the indexes depends on subject matter, too. Legal indexes of court cases almost always add onto the previous index because most old cases are still relevant. Indexes of statutes are frequently limited to one year. > > 3) Finally, where do old indexes go? Suppose the index is stored as a > separate issue or volume and updated regularly -- which is expensive. Does > O'Reilly & Associates give it away for free to its subscribers, or are > subscribers expected to buy it (or, more accurately, does O'Reilly have to > market the index as a separate book)? Or should the index be placed in the > back of the "most recent" appropriate issue, to be kept for time immemorial, > even once it becomes out of date with the distributiopn of the next issue? Whether subscribers keep old indexes depends on how useful they (and the cited articles) are. Annual indexes for computer magazines from the early 1980's are not very useful. But Natioanl Geographic has recently published a cumulative index including the original issue. I think many publishers charge extra if the indexes are separate. It's hard to charge extra if the index is bound with the last issue of the year. Even though the index is out of date when the next issue is published, it is remains useful until the articles cited are no longer useful or until the index is replaced by a cumulative index. Readers will find it much easier to check three or four individual issues and a cumulative index than search through four or five years' worth of journals for that elusive article! Nancy Etheridge ethern@freenet.scri.fsu.edu ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 08:48:33 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Automated indexing - GREPping keywords from a predefined file (Long). I wrote earlier about our ongoing job of assigning approved keywords ('descriptors') to scientific journal articles. We began by looking up what we thought might be appropriate terms in a large paperback thesaurus and then, once found, handwriting them on to a sheet which listed the article titles and other details. Our next step was to obtain a computerised list of all the descriptors that had been used in the past and to turn that - as I described earlier - into a Word dictionary file using Macrex. This meant that we could type descriptors into a Word document and spell-check them to ensure they were in the thesaurus (the match between previously-used terms and terms actually in the thesaurus was pretty good - about 99%). I also wrote a lot of AutoCorrect shortcuts to automatically expand abbreviations - e.g. 'AtOcI' was automatically expanded into 'Atmosphere ocean interactions' My next thought was whether the whole process could be automated by getting the computer to do the looking up. I experimented with the Access database program but found it was too inflexible for someone with my limited programming skills. Instead I used Visual Basic, which I am fairly familiar with, to write a program that: a) Loads the document number and the first few words of the title from an on-line list and displays these at the top of the screen. b) Allows the user to type in keywords to search for (usually several at once). c) Searches the file of previously-used descriptors for these keywords. d) Takes the output from this search and displays it in an alphabetical list. e) Allows the user to click or double-click on items in that list to assign them to a 'descriptor' field. f) Adds the final choice of descriptors to a text file on disk. g) Goes on to the next document. Thus if I decide that a document is about, say, flocculation and gold, I can type in 'flocc|gold', and get an alphabetical list of all the entries in the previously-used descriptor list that include either or both of those terms. I then browse through these to find the ones that best match the content of the document, and assign them to that document with a click or two of the mouse. As originally written the program was entirely in Visual Basic, and as a result the search step c) was very slow. I decided to go outside Visual Basic just for this step. A better programmer could probably have written their own search routine, but I took advantage of a pre-existing DOS utility called 'GREP' [derived from a UNIX version called, I think, 'Get Regular Expression Parser'(?)] which runs from the command-line and very quickly retrieves matching lines from a text file. Working a reference to GREP into the Visual Basic program wasn't quite so easy because Visual Basic doesn't like quote marks in command-line parameters. What I had to do was to write a batch file, which VB can run, and use the batch file to call the GREP program. The screen flashes to DOS when I do this, which is a nuisance, but when the DOS screen disappears I know the matching records have been found (the process takes between one and five seconds to go through 12,000 records) and I can go ahead and ask the VB program to list them. Since the program was written I've made a few improvements - it now allows the user to enter and save comments, it can print the final listing of documents indexed, and it will resize to run on a VGA or Super VGA screen. More recently I've run it under Windows 95 with no problems, except that the DOS window doesn't appear but merely runs in the background. The time spent on the program will be recouped in time saved over the length of the job. A bonus is that the risk of typos is reduced to a minimum. I've described this at length, partly in case anyone on the list is in the same situation and could benefit from the program, but mainly to encourage indexers to look for ways to automate their work. I know there are a lot of enthusiastic Macrex and Cindex supporters here, and it only takes a little programming knowledge to be able to supplement those programs with a variety of special-purpose applications like the one described. Another area where I've found this useful is in name indexing. Comments and descriptions of similar systems welcome. Jonathan. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne Blaxland NSW Australia 061-47-398-199 jonathan@magna.com.au Australian Wildlife in the Cheese Shop: "We had some, but the cat's eaten it." ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 08:49:02 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Electronic indexing - indexer's control over Lynn Moncrief wrote: >Glenda and Jonathan wrote: > >>What About Electronic Indexing? >> >>Although we have tried indexing directly from manuscripts on disk, in >>practice this tends to be slower and less effective than the traditional >>means of indexing from paper. Electronic indexing depends on getting >>the index entry right first time, every time... >... I don't quite understand what you meant by having to >get the index entry right the first time when embedding (being that all >of the products I've used allow editing your entries)... I may have used the wrong words, but I was thinking specifically of the situation where the indexer is producing an embedded index and then handing back the file to the author/publisher for further work. This means that the author may end up changing the context of the embedded index entry and then going ahead to compile and print the index which is now wrong. If this is disallowed by the indexer, however, it makes embedded indexing even less useful. > I found it >extremely helpful to create the index first in dedicated indexing >software. (Not all projects allow time to do this.) That's where I do >all of the massaging needed and finish the index there just as I would >if I were going to deliver a non-embedded index.... I then embed the index entries >into the electronic files using the page-order sort as a guide. ... The final step is just cleaning up any typos, etc. >made in the embedding process after generating the index from the files. What control do you then have over the fate of the embedded index? If an author or publisher was to botch it up horribly by editing the text before producing a final, do you have any recourse? Regards Jonathan. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne Blaxland NSW Australia 061-47-398-199 jonathan@magna.com.au Australian Wildlife in the Cheese Shop: "We had some, but the cat's eaten it." ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 08:50:17 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Re: print v. CD-ROM (was getting past "indexer's block") Jean Dartnall wrote: >When I >work at the Information Desk in the Library here, I often encourage >students to learn how to use journal indexes on the print version first >before trying CD-ROM or online versions so that they are only learning >one new process at a time. It also gives them a better 'feel' for >the size and scope of the index I think than it is possible to get by >sitting down to a screen. What do the indexers for this sort of database >think? I think it is important to teach the principles of database organisation, use of controlled vocabulary, etc., but I'm not sure that I think this is necessarily easier in print. And if they will be using CD-ROM in future, they definitely need advice that is specific to CD-ROM searching, particularly a comparison of the results from using keyword searching and subject heading searching, and the use of an online thesaurus if available. I remember sitting in agony as a student at a huge desk in the reference section of the library, trying to find the appropriate volumes of Index Medicus (which were scattered all over the table, or were in use by someone else at the time). For me CD-ROM is a dream, and the sooner the students can be using it, the better. Glenda. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne Blaxland NSW Australia 061-47-398-199 jonathan@magna.com.au Australian Wildlife in the Cheese Shop: "We had some, but the cat's eaten it." ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 08:50:24 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Re: variant forms of names >>The author has determined that this is in all likelihood >>the same place as "Mabila," so she wants a cross-reference. > >I would use the parentheses. The author's solution is a little too precise >for the reader who doesn't know which is which, and makes them do extra work >to figure it out. They'll get to read about the names on the page; let her >explain the difference there. > >Mabila (Movila), 226 >Movila (Mabila), 226 > If it is necessary to indicate that they are probably, but might *not* be the same place, perhaps a ? could be added, e.g. Mabila (Movila?) 226 Jon and Glenda. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne Blaxland NSW Australia 061-47-398-199 jonathan@magna.com.au Australian Wildlife in the Cheese Shop: "We had some, but the cat's eaten it." ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 08:50:32 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Doubled messages My apologies of some of our messages to this group appear twice: we are having trouble with our mail server. Jonathan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne Blaxland NSW Australia 061-47-398-199 jonathan@magna.com.au Australian Wildlife in the Cheese Shop: "We had some, but the cat's eaten it." ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 08:56:32 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Re: Is the time right to take the USDA course? (esp. after Money article) In-Reply-To: <9509230125.AA07781@symnet.net> On Fri, 22 Sep 1995, Kay Crissman wrote: > I have not read the Money article about indexing that everyone keeps > referring to but from Hazel and Norma's comments it seems to have greatly > increased the number of students taking the USDA Indexing course. > Last spring I wrote asking about the USDA course and received much good advice . > I have been looking forward to signing up for it but have only now > budgeted enough money for it. Wouldn't you know now that I am ready that > many other people are signing up. I am wondering if I should go ahead or > wait another month or two when the demand for the course may not be so > great. I'm one of the teachers of the Basic Indexing course. My advice to you is to sign up to take the course whenever *you* feel like taking it. Don't worry about all the other people who're signing up. A number have dropped out already. I sent index-l a message from one prospective student who was appalled that "indexing" meant "preparing an index in the back of a book." This person demanded a refund. Another prospective student read the FAQ that Norma sent out and decided that indexing simply wasn't for her. I've lost track of how many students I have. Lots of people begin the course (even before the Money magazine article came out), but many never complete it. Indexing is usually either something you like or something you hate. Not much in between. Frankly, the more freelance there are out there, the more visibility our profession gets, and the more work there is. Think of all the authors who're struggling to prepare their own indexes and going bonkers at the same time. (I've received several late night phone calls from authors: "Help! I started doing an index to my book, and I just can't stand it! Will you do it?" "Help! I'd rather pick lint out of my carpet than write an index!") And publishers are downsizing all the time, which means that they're relying more and more on freelancers to complete projects. Don't worry about what other people are doing. Just be concerned with your own goals. You've got to be assertive and persistent and tough to run your own business, and you can't let the mere possibility of competition worry you. Do what's best for *you*. Anyway, just my brash $.02. Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "Shake and shake / The catsup bottle. / None will come, / And then a lot'll." --Richard Armour ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 09:46:56 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Richard Evans Subject: Re: New Indexers I have a one-day workshop on the indexing of software manuals. One part addresses how you decide on what level of detail you can handle. The list, in order from simplest to most complex, is: Headings Subjects of figures, tables, and examples Acronyms and abbreviations Functions New or special terms Definitions and descriptions Restrictions and warnings New and difficult concepts User synonyms User tasks User synonyms and user tasks are truly the most difficult because they require knowledge of not only the product from the developer's perspective but also from the user's perspective. My favorite example of user tasks was in the user's manual for my first IBM ProPrinter in 1985. It was advertised as "Near Letter Quality", or "NLQ." Of course, the first thing I looked for in the index was NLQ or Near Letter Quality. Nothing. I tried "fonts", "typefaces", etc. No luck. I eventually found the topic indexed under "sending ASCII codes to the printer." In order to print in NLQ, you had to imbed ASCII control codes in your documents. To the programmer who wrote the printer software, the task was "sending ASCII codes to the printer." To the end user, the task was "printing in NLQ." An example of synonyms is the case where one word processor refers to "retrieving documents" but another refers to the same operation as "opening files." If you are used to one and are trying to migrate to the other it would be a big help if the index included both terms with appropriate cross references. This, however, requires that the indexer be familiar with both. BTW, both of these examples are classic illustrations of the limitations of electronic indexing. Such indexing will only pick up what is in the text and not do the intellectual analysis required to extrapolate to entries that do not appear in the text. Dick Evans ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 10:18:13 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: indexing a journal not yet written Seth, I work on several journal indexes and do a variety of "back-of-the-journal" indexes. I also do similar work for several newsletters. In general, I write an index for the volume and it is published in the last issue of the volume. in some cases, that's all that issue is, the index. in other cases, it appears in the back of that volume issue. sometimes the index issue is a supplement issue, included in the subscription. Now, some volumes are annual, some are quarterly, and some are semi-annual. They are all treated in the same fashion (I should also point out that some volumes come out bimonthly, some monthly, some weekly, etc). Multi-volume (or multi-annual) issues are combined by an indexer and provided separately for those who need. that's a whole 'nother can of worms... [as Carolyn got at so wonderfully...;-)] hope this helps! have fun, Pilar Wyman Indexing Annapolis, MD tel/fax: 410/263-7537 Email: PilarW@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 13:08:55 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lynn Moncrief Subject: Re: Translation Issues and Indexes In a message dated 95-09-23 05:01:27 EDT, you write: >I have a corporate client who markets globally. Since their product >documentation is translated into many languages, I advised them that it >would be better for them to submit the index to their translators as a >separate file rather than as embedded tags that would generate the index. >The main advantage, from a translation standpoint, is that the index could >be translated more effectively that way because the translators would have >the "whole picture." Lori, Interesting that your question came up at a time when a) I'm working on an embedded index and b) I'm constantly shifting languages all day with my Italian-speaking houseguests. ;-D I too have a corporate client who markets globally. The Managing Editor and I have tried for several years to get them to move from embedded indexing to separate files, however the translators continue to insist on embedded tags. I wish I could give you more ammunition, but unfortunately I can see it from the translators' viewpoint as well. > >Any thoughts on this? If any of you develop indexes for product >documentation that is translated into many languages, I'd like to hear >about your approaches. > >Thanks in advance .... This is purely conjecture, but I suspect that the reason that translators prefer embedded indexes is that, once a document is translated, its pagination is very likely to change. English is far more succinct than many Romance languages, for example, particularly for expressing technical concepts. (This became very apparent to me when translating a technical document from Italian to English.) Thus an index with locators based upon the English version would probably give them fits in assigning new locators. Embedded tags or fields, OTOH, would "walk" with the new pagination, maintaining accuracy in the locators. I suspect that translators are also working with the English version of the generated index while translating so that their translation will be within the context of the original index structure. However, they may also need to see the actual context in which the entries were made to render them accurately in the target language. Consider how we indexers have to wrestle with context to properly cast our entries in the first place. ;-) Embedded tags are right there in the document directly within the needed context. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 13:08:58 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lynn Moncrief Subject: Re: Electronic indexing - indexer's control over In a message dated 95-09-23 05:31:41 EDT, Jonathan wrote: >I may have used the wrong words, but I was thinking specifically of the >situation where the indexer is producing an embedded index and then handing >back the file to the author/publisher for further work. This means that the >author may end up changing the context of the embedded index entry and then >going ahead to compile and print the index which is now wrong. If this is >disallowed by the indexer, however, it makes embedded indexing even less >useful. > > >What control do you then have over the fate of the embedded index? If an >author or publisher was to botch it up horribly by editing the text before >producing a final, do you have any recourse? > >Regards >Jonathan. Jonathan, You've made excellent points here. I guess that I've been fortunate in that I get the files for indexing after the final edit in most cases. Also, my embedded indexing clients often give me a copy of the printed manual and the index is almost always exactly as I submitted it. However, a software company client actually inserted the following practical joke into one of my indexes (which appeared in the printed manual distributed worldwide ;-D): loops, infinite. See (Product name), no exit (Product name), no exit. See loops, infinite I've often received and delivered the embedded files directly to publishers' desktop publishing contractors who are waiting to do the final layout--safely beyond the final writing and editing stages. This is one reason I prefer to work in FrameMaker vs. Word as it's the final destination of files that were originally created in MS Word. OTOH, we don't have any guarantee against publishers making changes to indexes we create as stand-alone files. The other day, I proofread one that came back from the typesetter in which the editors decided to insert an additional subentry and demote four other subentries to subsubentries under it. While it was appropriate for two of the subentries, it wasn't for two others, IMHO. BTW, even though I've often posted messages here on embedded indexing, it's definitely my least favorite indexing activity. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 13:30:36 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Fred Leise Subject: Re: public/private cooperation, controlled term for? My vote would be for "public-private partnerships." ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 11:18:07 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: Is the time right to take the USDA course? (esp. after Money article) In-Reply-To: <199509231304.GAA28840@callamer.com> Hazel, what a great, upbeat message. Thanks! I have to agree. You either enjoy indexing, or you hate it. The Money Magazine article surely attracted lots of people who THOUGHT it was a great way to get rich in a hurry...but it also interested folks who thought indexing sounded like an interesting job (and who might actually have some talent for it). I've never taken the USDA course...I didn't even know it existed until I'd been doing indexes for about ten years. And, I blush to admit, I didn't know you were a teacher of that course. Now I'm wondering if I'd pass... :-) |==========| | Sonsie | |==========| ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 11:28:03 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: New Indexers In-Reply-To: <199509231352.GAA05145@callamer.com> > User synonyms and user tasks are truly the most difficult because they > require knowledge of not only the product from the developer's perspective > but also from the user's perspective. > > My favorite example of user tasks was in the user's manual for my first IBM > ProPrinter in 1985. It was advertised as "Near Letter Quality", or "NLQ." > Of course, the first thing I looked for in the index was NLQ or Near Letter > Quality. Nothing. I tried "fonts", "typefaces", etc. No luck. I > eventually found the topic indexed under "sending ASCII codes to the > printer." > > In order to print in NLQ, you had to imbed ASCII control codes in your > documents. To the programmer who wrote the printer software, the task was > "sending ASCII codes to the printer." To the end user, the task was > "printing in NLQ." Dick, this is EXACTLY the problem with so many technical books meant for nontechnical users. Computer-type manuals come instantly to mind, but I'm sure there are books on electrical and plumbing repair, etc., that also are written by experts for novices. The indexer's most important duty, IMO, is to make the contents of the book or manual accessible to the reader. If the audience consists of non-tecchie sorts, yu're going to have to know the concepts the way the AUDIENCE recognizes them, and prepare the index from that POV. Obviously, you're going to have to understand (to use your example) what ASCII codes are, and how they produce NLQ printing, in order to correctly place this concept in the index for the use of your audience. So, in a sense, you have to work from both sides to the middle. Explicating technical jargon in a language a nontechnical audience understands, and at the same time producing a "correct" index from the POV of the material. A good index will end up with a full discussion of ASCII codes in the appropriate place, and ALSO plenty of "see" and "see also" references directing readers from "printing quality," "NLQ," etc., to the correct discussion. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 14:59:19 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lynn Moncrief Subject: Re: New Indexers Jane, Welcome to indexing! It's great to see how you and your colleagues are making such an effort to learn what you can on properly preparing indexes! In a message dated 95-09-23 05:00:17 EDT, Jane Matsoff wrote: > >We manually mark entries in our Microsoft Word 6.0 documents and then >generate the index. Does anyone else use this feature in Word? Is there >another package, (that works with Word) that you would recommend? I've created indexes in Word 2.0 and having read the appropriate section of the manual to my yet uninstalled version 6.0 there isn't too much difference. Perhaps someone else knows of another package that works with Word. > >So far we've marked entries at the bottom of the page rather than right >after the word or phrase to index. This method allows us to read our text >and make necessary changes, but it's easy to lose track of the entries if we >make a big edit. Where do you recommend we mark our entries? Please don't do that! :-D If material is deleted, you may end up with index entries referring to non-existing material. If material is added, your fields may easily end up on another page, giving the wrong locators in the index. I strongly recommend placing your fields as close to the word or phrase that they refer to. When an entry refers to a section covered by a heading, I place the field either just before the paragraph mark at the end of the heading or just before the first character of the body text. If a page range for a section ends with a figure or table, I put the end of the bookmark establishing the range within the title or caption of the figure itself. This is going under the reasonable assumption that the title and figure will stay together, just as a heading stays with the first paragraph of the body text. Cross-references not requiring page locators (all "See" references and those "See also" references for main headings that will be followed by subentries) should be grouped together in one file, such as the introduction, preface, etc. By keeping this file open while you work on other files, you can add target entries to these cross-references, merging them alphabetically as you go along. If you don't, you'll end up creating individual fields for your cross-references' target entries scattered throughout the book and you'll have an awful nightmare of having to clean them up and merge them while editing the index. I learned this the hard way. ;-D One big problem I've had with MS Word is when the Word files will be ported to a desktop publishing program and/or figures are added after indexing. This can make a discussion that previously was contained on one page later span two because of an intervening page break. To prevent this, you can create bookmarks for those passages where you suspect that may happen, however, in a large book you can run up against Word's maximum bookmark limit (which I think is 650 in version 6.0). If that happens, Word won't warn you. It'll just flat-out refuse to generate the index or generate one filled with error messages. Aiiish! One important point. You do know that in Word you can you can enter whatever text you chose into the index entry fields and are not limited simply to whatever you can highlight on the page. I suspect you do because if you were merely highlighting text, your entry fields would appear right next to what was highlighted, not at the bottom of the page where you've been placing them. This allows double-posting, cross-referencing, etc. > >How do you decide how heavily to index? We would like to make a guideline >so that we all index similarly. (If you are familiar with the Information >Mapping method, we write our documents according to that philosophy and in >most cases index to the block level--or for each paragraph) I'll avoid covering the same things that Dick Evans did in his response to you. The depth to which you index procedures often depends upon the way they are written. If individual steps contain a paragraph or more of explanation, I recommend indexing those particular steps. If the steps are only on the order of "Click OK" or "Select File/Save", I index only the procedure as a whole. Like Dick, I strongly suggest indexing warnings, cautions, notes, etc. I recommend indexing file names where files are described because many software users go on search and destroy missions on their hard disks and would like to know the purpose of a specific file or file extension before deleting them. Speaking of file extensions--they're a major bugaboo, especially in Word where you can't control the sort order. Don't enter the period preceding the file extension in your fields. For example, enter .EXE files as EXE files. This prevents Word from sorting on the period which will cause these entries to float to the top of the index where users aren't likely to look for them. If your software has a GUI (graphical user interface), there are pitfalls specific to indexing GUI components to watch out for. Don't try to index every instance of every menu command, for example, as they can appear hundreds of times, especially in procedures. Index them only where the menu and/or its selections are actually described. GUI components within dialog boxes (e.g., list boxes, radio buttons, etc.) can also seduce you into over-indexing, but do index the descriptions of the dialog boxes themselves. If you can get readers to the dialog box descriptions, they'll find the details about their contents. OTOH, I do index the individual buttons when described for toolbars as readers are very likely to look them up (considering how cryptic the icons on them often are). Another frequent issue is whether to index, for example, individual window names under a heading "windows" or individual dialog boxes under "dialog boxes". This can lead to huge subentry lists. So it is better to create general cross-references from these headings (e.g., See also entries for specific windows) and create subentries only for topics covering windows in general (e.g., resizing, moving, etc.). The best tip I can give you is to create the index in dedicated indexing software if at all possible before embedding fields in Word. If you can't, keep regenerating the index, at least each time you complete a chapter. Otherwise, you're working without any knowledge (except what you can remember) of the structure of the index itself as it forms. By generating the index for each chapter as you complete it, you can immediately make corrections while that file is still open. After generating the chapter index, generate the index for the whole book as far as you've indexed it. That will give you a developing structure to refer to as you go along. If you don't do this, you'll end up with an index containing an awful "drift factor" in its terminology, massive structural problems, full of entries that didn't merge, inconsistent double-posting, etc. A true horror to edit. Editing indexes in Word is pretty difficult as it is because you have to manually open every file to edit the fields. Plus you don't see the results of your edits until you regenerate the index. Good luck!! Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs >Jane Matsoff >janem@decisionsys.com >Decision Systems, Inc. >Mpls., MN ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 20 Sep 1995 13:05:18 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Diane Worden Subject: Poynter, 8th rev ed (1995) Dan Poynter's "The Self-Publishing Manual: How to Write, Print and Sell Your Own Book," 8th rev ed, 1995, 448p, contains three paragraphs (half a page, total) about indexing. He advises authors to do it while wordprocessing, but does say, "Indexing software is available, and there are professinal indexers." In a 45-page appendix, he lists a vast number of specific resources for self-publishing authors. ASI or its "Indexer Locator" is not among them. Throughout his book, Poynter encourages readers to contact him about corrections or additions for his next edition (clever strategy; he always has a new version being created by others). Has anyone submitted suggested copy to improve his advice about indexing, upon reading his 8th or any of his previous editions? Did you receive any response and, if so, what kind? Diane Worden, Kalamazoo, Mich WordenDex@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 15:55:09 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: New Indexers Jane, Although I am certain that my good friend and colleague Lynn's advice is accurate and helpful, should you continue to do your own embedded indexes, I'd like to encourage you to look into having a professional indexer do the job for you. I am certain that the best index you could create the way you are approaching the task will not be as good as one created by an indexer -- due to your own inexperience in indexing, and to the shortcomings of embedded (machine) indexing. I strongly believe that if you added up the time it would take you and/or colleagues, reviewers, checkers, etc, to do the index and multiply by some dollar per hour factor to get a total cost of your machine index you would be horrified at how much it was costing you, for a less than wonderful product. Why not get an estimate of how much it is really costing you your way, and get some bids from professional indexers. I suspect you'll be pleasantly surprised. And you'd be guaranteed high quality and, hopefully, no errors such as can slip into machine indexes, as Lynn pointed out. The American Society of Indexers can help you locate an indexer in your field and/or your locale, if that is important to you. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing Scottsdale, AZ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 16:25:33 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lynn Moncrief Subject: Tech terminology (was: New Indexers) In a message dated 95-09-23 14:35:40 EDT, Sonsie wrote: >Dick, this is EXACTLY the problem with so many technical books meant for >nontechnical users. Computer-type manuals come instantly to mind, but I'm >sure there are books on electrical and plumbing repair, etc., that also >are written by experts for novices. Sonsie, Just as bad are books written by "experts" who actually misuse technical terminology. A few months ago, I indexed a book that contained a section on electronics. The author used the term "integrate" signals in a sentence that merely meant that signals were "combined". He definitely wasn't talking about the specific wave-shaping process of integrating a signal (the electrical analog of integrating a function in calculus). Worse yet, this word was bold-faced as a vocabulary word, meaning that I was supposed to dignify this error in the index. (The sentence was a passing reference that I would have otherwise ignored, but this book was full of vocabulary terms that were just thrown out there so that students could memorize a new word without truly knowing what it meant.) With a great gnashing of teeth, I indexed it and can only hope that the instructors who will eventually use this textbook will correct this with their students. (I doubt that the publisher was able to do anything about it.) So, on a variation of an earlier lament here about where are the copyeditors and development editors, let's add: Where are the technical editors? Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs > ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 17:10:51 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kevin Subject: Re: Poynter, 8th rev ed (1995) Diane Worden wrote: >Dan Poynter's "The Self-Publishing Manual: How to Write, Print and Sell Your >Own Book," 8th rev ed, 1995, 448p, contains three paragraphs (half a page, >total) about indexing. He advises authors to do it while wordprocessing, but >does say, "Indexing software is available, and there are professinal >indexers." Diane went on to ask about/suggest writing to the author pointing out ASI as a resource. At first I thought she was referring to a book I used when I self-published my first book. It turns out the one I was thinking of is called "The Complete Guide to Self-Publishing" by Tom and Marilyn Ross. While an excellent text overall, it has a *very* inflammatory section on indexing: " ... no one is more familiar with the material-or better equipped to make these decisions-than you. (Ironically, many trade publishing houses delegate this function to a free-lance indexer, who earns $ 8 to 12 an hour, typically paid out of the author's royalties!)" His index was not the worst I've ever seen, but it was poorly edited. Nary a "see" reference referred to a term with more than a single page reference. I thought about writing him, but I never did. Here's a good line of reasoning to use with people who question the need for a professional indexer. It comes from advice guru Bruce Williams, on Talknet (AM radio). Bruce is arguably the most experienced common sense human on the planet, if not the solar system. Whenever anyone asks if they really need a lawyer for some legal task he says: Dentists and lawyers are both intelligent well-educated people. When you have a cavity, would you want a lawyer to fill it? When you get arrested, would you call the dentist? Kevin Mulrooney ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dyslexics of the world untie! First State Indexing (302) 738-2558 276 East Main Street Indexer@inetcom.net Newark, Delaware 19711 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 17:11:29 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kevin Subject: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? As I mentioned a while back, I'm working on an article for Keywords about using the GROUPS command in Cindex to update existing indexes; either your own on disk or the existing text (done by another indexer). There's something about seeing your own words in print, like in Index-L or Keywords, that makes you examine more carefully the 1) truthfulness, 2) legality, and 3) morality of what it is you're really saying. So it is with this article. In the article I mention that one of several options for doing an update edition is scanning/typing in the existing index for later manipulation with the GROUPS command. I have begun to wonder about the legality and morality of this process, i.e., taking another indexer's work, scanning it in, and performing on it anything from negligible changes (other than updating the pages), to a complete rewrite. >From day one as a free-lancer, I have received projects in which I was asked to update an existing index. I would always wonder who did the last index: the author; an inhouse person at the publishing company; or another free-lancer like me. If it was another free-lancer, why weren't they called? I have concluded that editors have great difficulty keeping track of us. This conclusion is due in part to an amusing but slightly depressing experience in which I was told to do an update and could I please stick *very* close to the last indexer's style since the author loved the index. I think you can see where this is leading; *I* was the previous indexer! That (helping editors keep track of the work you've done for them) is a topic for a whole different thread!!! More on this point sometime. Anyway, back to the moral dilemma at hand. I doubt if any fulltime free-lancer would tell an editor with a non-first edition project that we weren't interested in doing it unless the previous indexer can not be located or is unavailable. "No" is a word that isn't in my vocabulary when an editor with work is on the other end of the line. So if we have no problem with potentially "stepping in" on another indexer's "downline" work, should we have a problem with scanning in their work to update? Any thoughts on this would be appreciated. Peace and success to all who deserve it; certainly at the minumum all those on Index-L! Kevin Mulrooney ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dyslexics of the world untie! First State Indexing (302) 738-2558 276 East Main Street Indexer@inetcom.net Newark, Delaware 19711 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 18:25:51 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: BOB KROVETZ Subject: machine indexing horror story There are lots of ways of doing a bad job, and machine indexing is no exception. It does not mean that machine indexing is inherently bad, and the examples given would be trivial to fix. We are not yet at the point of fully-automatic high quality back-of-the-book indexing, but that doesn't mean that such efforts should not be supported. The comparison with creationism is unwarranted. Bob krovetz@cs.umass.edu ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 18:06:27 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: Tech terminology (was: New Indexers) In-Reply-To: <199509232026.NAA17432@callamer.com> Lynn, I probably would not have caught that "integrated" error myself, but I've found a few grievous mistakes when indexing books on subjects I'm intimately familiar with. In the most recent cases, I've called the production editor and told her about the problem (which in both cases was fairly easy to correct) and she has been extremely happy to hear about it. It makes me concerned, though, to find such obvious mistakes that late in the game. And knowing how many technical books I do index, I'm sure some errors have slipped by me due to my own lack of knowledge. |==========| | Sonsie | |==========| ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 18:19:18 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? In-Reply-To: <199509232113.OAA23042@callamer.com> On Sat, 23 Sep 1995, Kevin wrote: > In the article I mention that one of several options for doing an update > edition is scanning/typing in the existing index for later manipulation with > the GROUPS command. I have begun to wonder about the legality and morality > of this process, i.e., taking another indexer's work, scanning it in, and > performing on it anything from negligible changes (other than updating the > pages), to a complete rewrite. My understanding of the LEGAL aspect of this is that indexers are almost always doing a work for hire. In other words, we do not own the copyright to our index; it is owned by the publishing company we do the work for. So I'd say, legally, the publisher has the right to do whatever it wants to about revisions, including allowing or asking you to scan in the old index and manipulate it any way you need to in order to update it. Even if this means doing substantial revisions. Of course, if you are NOT doing a work for hire, you own the copyright to your index, and only YOU can allow another indexer to manipulate or change it. But I don't think we encounter this situation very often. > > >From day one as a free-lancer, I have received projects in which I was asked > to update an existing index. I would always wonder who did the last index: > the author; an inhouse person at the publishing company; or another > free-lancer like me. If it was another free-lancer, why weren't they > called? I have concluded that editors have great difficulty keeping track > of us. It may also be that the publisher was not particularly pleased with the original job. One of the questions I routinely ask, for books other than first editions, is to see a copy of the last index, and any comments the author or publisher has about it (good, bad, useful, needs work, etc.). Just seeing what another indexer has done can sometimes help you decide how to handle sticky problems, but I usually find my work is better than what I'm updating. And so I end up more or less doing everything from scratch. I doubt if any fulltime > free-lancer would tell an editor with a non-first edition project that we > weren't interested in doing it unless the previous indexer can not be > located or is unavailable. "No" is a word that isn't in my vocabulary when > an editor with work is on the other end of the line. So if we have no > problem with potentially "stepping in" on another indexer's "downline" work, > should we have a problem with scanning in their work to update? I don't have a problem with doing work on a new edition of a book that has previously been indexed by someone else. Either the publisher didn't like the work, or it has not kept good records. Whatever, the job is mine now! And, as I said earlier, I don't think we have a legal right to object (in most cases) to having our work scanned in and redone. I frankly don't find it a real moral issue, either, since I don't get very attached to my work and it's absolutely useless to me once it's gone to the publisher. We're not talking about deathless prose with a huge market, we're talking about something that is completely specific not only to a single book, but to a single EDITION of that book. You're not losing a dime if someone reprints 10,000 copies of your index and plasters the streets of New York with them, so I don't see a moral dilemma. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 05:42:13 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Re: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? Kevin wrote: I have begun to wonder about the legality and morality >of this process, i.e., taking another indexer's work, scanning it in, and >performing on it anything from negligible changes (other than updating the >pages), to a complete rewrite. > So if we have no >problem with potentially "stepping in" on another indexer's "downline" work, >should we have a problem with scanning in their work to update? > Kevin, In Australia an indexer owns the copyright in their work. Scanning it and using it for a new edition is therefore a breach of copyright, in my understanding. I expect it is probably the same in the U.S. Also, although I have never repaginated an index, I have heard from others that it can be as time-consuming as starting from scratch. Glenda. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne Blaxland NSW Australia 061-47-398-199 jonathan@magna.com.au Australian Wildlife in the Cheese Shop: "We had some, but the cat's eaten it." ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 05:42:04 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Re: Freelance indexers, editors' failure to recall At 17:11 23/09/95 -0400, you wrote: >... I have concluded that editors have great difficulty keeping track >of us. This conclusion is due in part to an amusing but slightly depressing >experience in which I was told to do an update and could I please stick >*very* close to the last indexer's style since the author loved the index. I >think you can see where this is leading; *I* was the previous indexer! That >(helping editors keep track of the work you've done for them) is a topic for >a whole different thread!!! More on this point sometime. That has been our experience too. What seems to happen is that editors have a 'stable' of indexers they prefer to work with, and when 'your' editor has a busy period, you are likely to as well. And since the turnover of editors is so high it can rapidly go from feast to famine. My only suggestion is to keep canvassing. Make sure this month's crop of editors know you're out there. In the longer term, perhaps editors should be asked to check the name of the indexer in the previous edition of the book before they start calling around (you DID have your name in the book, I hope.. ;-)) Jonathan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne Blaxland NSW Australia 061-47-398-199 jonathan@magna.com.au Australian Wildlife in the Cheese Shop: "We had some, but the cat's eaten it." ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 05:50:48 EDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lori Lathrop <76620.456@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Indexing in la-la land .... A little indexing humor to start your week. After delivering indexing workshops at client sites, I returned to Colorado last week just in time for a nasty snow storm, which dropped 9 inches on us. On Friday, when everything was beginning to melt, I slipped on the ice on our porch steps and managed to fracture a small bone in my foot (near an old fracture that still shows up on the x-rays), sprain my ankle, wrench my back, and get a whopper of a bruise my butt. I s'pose I should be glad that I landed on my butt (where I have some extra padding!) and not on my face, eh? Anyway, I'm now on crutches and super-duper pain pills, and I thought you'd get a kick out of an "index" I wrote while under the influence of the pain pills .... back massage therapy 104 wrenched 103 bruises butt 102 psyche 101 butt, bruised 102 codeine, synthetic *See* Vicodin colors, in la-la land 105-106 deadlines, indexing 69-71 diagnosis difficulties 101-102 dreams, bizarre 105 *See also* Vicodin drowsiness bizarre dreams and 105 compared to sleepiness 106 while indexing 107 embarrassment due to bruised psyche 101 neighbors and 106 foot fracture diagnosis difficulties 101-102 pain pills for 101 x-rays painful positions for 102-103 showing old injuries 102 gimp jokes 106 indexing deadlines 69-71 while drowsy 107 injuries new 102 old bicycling dancing ice skating sailing over steps in dimly-lit restaurant tennis tobaganning volleyball klutz, natural born 100 la-la land *See also* drowsiness; pain pills; Vicodin colors in 105-106 indexing in 99 Vicodin and 105 massage therapy 104 natural-born klutz 100 neighbors, gimp jokes and 106 pain pills *See also* drowsiness; la-la land for back, wrenched 103 bizarre dreams and 105 for bruised butt 102 for foot injuries 101 Vicodin 105 psyche, bruised 101 *See also* embarrassment sleepiness 106 super-duper pain 101 synthetic codeine *See* Vicodin Vicodin *See also* la-la land; pain pills bizarre dreams and 104 prescribed for super-duper pain 101 synthetic codeine, effects of 104-105 x-rays painful positions for 102-103 showing old injuries 102 TTFN .... Lori ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 11:02:04 +8 Reply-To: grant@onyxgfx.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: Grant Hogarth Organization: Onyx Graphics Corp. Subject: Re: External data storage Kevin asks about ZIP drives. I bought one for myself about 4mo ago, and wouldn't be caught near a computer without it. In fact, our company liked (and kept borrowing it) so much that they've bought 3 more of them. As far as a "standard"... it's not (yet). Current "standards" are 88MB syquests, 105/230 MB Bernoullis, and 250MB QIC tapes. All of which are probably as likely to stay around as a 727. Mostly they will stay around because there are so many of them. New "standards" are likely to be (IMHO): 230MB MO disks, Travan tapes, Iomega JAZ (1GB) drives, and the ZIP. Regarding "getting things from clients"-- my experience is that you will get things in every format from 9-track tapes to CDROMs to boxes of floppies. Quite frankly, I would not worry about it unless I was going to work long-term over multiple projects with the same client. Otherwise I would go with the ZIP and cut a deal with a local computer shop (or Service Bureau) for a deal on tranferring stuff from whatever the customer has to whatever you have. Regards, Grant Hogarth BTW-- the ZIPs were hard to get because they were so popular. Iomega got caught flat-footed. Amazingly, they did not jack up their prices, nor did they allow their distributors to do so! Kudos to an (increasingly rare) ethical company!! =================================== Grant Hogarth, Information Services Manager Onyx Graphics Corp. Midvale, UT #include "Success is going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 11:27:49 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Larry Harrison Subject: Re: New Indexers Janet Perlman wrote: >... I'd like to encourage you to look into having a professional indexer do the >job for you. I agree. >The American Society of Indexers can help you locate an indexer in your field >and/or your locale, if that is important to you. I'm located in Rochester, Minn. -- just a hop and skip down Hwy 52. :-D Larry Harrison (larryh@millcomm.com) 507/280-0049 Freelance book indexing Rochester, Minnesota * Don't believe the Mac bigots who say the Mac has had all the * * Win 95 features since 1984. It had to be ... 1987, at least. * ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 11:24:13 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Larry Harrison Subject: Re: Getting started in indexing >>is there a point to my taking the usda correspondence >>course? >>i find that when i pick up a book just to try to index *for practice* i get >>very bogged down in detail and confused about what terms to include and >>what >>to omit. > >Indexing, like any other skill, requires training. Your confusion strongly >suggests you need an indexing course of some sort (whether the USDA or some >other). Good luck. > >Carol Roberts | I agree with Carol. I can remember this stage very clearly. Believe me, it is better to recognize and work on the problem now by taking some training than to face it when under deadline for a paid project. In the latter case, dollars and one's reputation are on the line. And remember, nothing personal, but not everyone is cut out to be an indexer. Only by persevering can one find out whether it gets better. Larry Harrison (larryh@millcomm.com) 507/280-0049 Freelance book indexing Rochester, Minnesota * Don't believe the Mac bigots who say the Mac has had all the * * Win 95 features since 1984. It had to be ... 1987, at least. * Larry Harrison (larryh@millcomm.com) 507/280-0049 Freelance book indexing Rochester, Minnesota * Don't believe the Mac bigots who say the Mac has had all the * * Win 95 features since 1984. It had to be ... 1987, at least. * ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 09:21:23 PDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elizabeth Rogers Subject: Re: unsubscribe In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 21 Sep 95 22:12:03 D. <199509220825.BAA21630@rand.org> Unsubscribe Elizabeth Rogers Thank you. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 24 Sep 1995 19:05:22 EDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "C.JACOBS" Subject: Re[2]: print v. CD-ROM (was getting past "indexer's block") In-Reply-To: In reply to your message of Fri, 22 Sep 1995 18:50:17 EDT >Jean Dartnall wrote: > >>When I >>work at the Information Desk in the Library here, I often encourage >>students to learn how to use journal indexes on the print version first >>before trying CD-ROM or online versions so that they are only learning >>one new process at a time. It also gives them a better 'feel' for >>the size and scope of the index I think than it is possible to get by >>sitting down to a screen. What do the indexers for this sort of database >>think? I think it is a good idea for several reasons. One is that it does give a better feel for what the actual index is. The computer screen allows only a little window into the collection, and to the novice there is very little indication of the structure of the data base. My experience in teaching library school students is that they have little conceptual grasp of the CD-ROM contents or structure. There is a basic assumption that the CD is always a better route for searching, but since they don't really understand the structure, they sometimes have difficulty performing good searches. (This is aside from the problem that some CD-ROM have such poor design or quality control that the print products are better). Students should be aware of both types of indexes, so that they can perform effective searches in various situations. (I get _very_ annoyed with students who say they haven't done an assignement because the CD-ROM was down! ) >From the point of view of a CD-ROM indexer, I feel that the better grasp people have of index structure, the better able they are to judge quality and to make reasonable demands on publishers to produce clean, effective CD-ROMs. We (the indexers) usually need more time to proofread CD products, to improve interfaces, and to do research into how the products are being used (so that we can adjust indexing and structure accordingly). So -- hope these comments help. Christine Jacobs (Montreal, Quebec) incj@musicb.mcgill.ca ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 24 Sep 1995 01:37:02 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Richard Evans Subject: Re: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? It's nice you're concerned, but your obligation lies solely with the publisher, who owns the index. The indexer relinquished all claim when the index was turned over to the publisher. Do it, don't worry about it. Dick Evans ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 21:56:07 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Jan C. Wright" Subject: Re: Translation Issues and Indexes In a message dated 95-09-23 05:01:16 EDT, you write: > Since their product >documentation is translated into many languages, I advised them that it >would be better for them to submit the index to their translators as a >separate file rather than as embedded tags that would generate the index. >The main advantage, from a translation standpoint, is that the index could >be translated more effectively that way because the translators would have >the "whole picture." A thorny one. I have done a lot of indexes that were going to be translated, and have heard a lot of different (and conflicting) opinions from the translators. There's a tradeoff timewise no matter what you do. It comes down to who spends a lot of time - the original indexer or the translators. One group I've worked with loves to have the index as a separate file - translating as a whole, and then searching and updating the page refs. The ease of writing the original, and then the ease of translating the original is offset by the time it requires to find the new page numbers, especially in German where things get longer by 1/3. Another group absolutely hates the updating of the page refs, and would rather have it embedded, even if they sacrifice seeing the whole. Here you have harder writing and embedding for the original indexer, ease but less perfect translation, and no page number updating. If you use PageMaker, or if you have specialized macros that let the translators work in a spreadsheet format, it would at least let you see the entries as a whole while translating, so it makes for a better translation. You still retain the benefits of no page number updates. Writing the original takes most of the time, because of all the extra embedding work or special coding to tell the macros where the entries go. Good luck working it out. I haven't met a solution yet that makes it easy for everyone involved! ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 23 Sep 1995 18:19:18 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? In-Reply-To: <199509232113.OAA23042@callamer.com> On Sat, 23 Sep 1995, Kevin wrote: > In the article I mention that one of several options for doing an update > edition is scanning/typing in the existing index for later manipulation with > the GROUPS command. I have begun to wonder about the legality and morality > of this process, i.e., taking another indexer's work, scanning it in, and > performing on it anything from negligible changes (other than updating the > pages), to a complete rewrite. My understanding of the LEGAL aspect of this is that indexers are almost always doing a work for hire. In other words, we do not own the copyright to our index; it is owned by the publishing company we do the work for. So I'd say, legally, the publisher has the right to do whatever it wants to about revisions, including allowing or asking you to scan in the old index and manipulate it any way you need to in order to update it. Even if this means doing substantial revisions. Of course, if you are NOT doing a work for hire, you own the copyright to your index, and only YOU can allow another indexer to manipulate or change it. But I don't think we encounter this situation very often. > > >From day one as a free-lancer, I have received projects in which I was asked > to update an existing index. I would always wonder who did the last index: > the author; an inhouse person at the publishing company; or another > free-lancer like me. If it was another free-lancer, why weren't they > called? I have concluded that editors have great difficulty keeping track > of us. It may also be that the publisher was not particularly pleased with the original job. One of the questions I routinely ask, for books other than first editions, is to see a copy of the last index, and any comments the author or publisher has about it (good, bad, useful, needs work, etc.). Just seeing what another indexer has done can sometimes help you decide how to handle sticky problems, but I usually find my work is better than what I'm updating. And so I end up more or less doing everything from scratch. I doubt if any fulltime > free-lancer would tell an editor with a non-first edition project that we > weren't interested in doing it unless the previous indexer can not be > located or is unavailable. "No" is a word that isn't in my vocabulary when > an editor with work is on the other end of the line. So if we have no > problem with potentially "stepping in" on another indexer's "downline" work, > should we have a problem with scanning in their work to update? I don't have a problem with doing work on a new edition of a book that has previously been indexed by someone else. Either the publisher didn't like the work, or it has not kept good records. Whatever, the job is mine now! And, as I said earlier, I don't think we have a legal right to object (in most cases) to having our work scanned in and redone. I frankly don't find it a real moral issue, either, since I don't get very attached to my work and it's absolutely useless to me once it's gone to the publisher. We're not talking about deathless prose with a huge market, we're talking about something that is completely specific not only to a single book, but to a single EDITION of that book. You're not losing a dime if someone reprints 10,000 copies of your index and plasters the streets of New York with them, so I don't see a moral dilemma. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 14:19:48 +8 Reply-To: grant@onyxgfx.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: Grant Hogarth Organization: Onyx Graphics Corp. Subject: Re: External data storage (ZIP drives) Apologies if this gets posted 2x.... It seemed to bounce the 1st time I sent it. Grant ===== resent message follows ===== Kevin asks about ZIP drives. I bought one for myself about 4mo ago, and wouldn't be caught near a computer without it. In fact, our company liked (and kept borrowing it) so much that they've bought 3 more of them. As far as a "standard"... it's not (yet). Current "standards" are 88MB syquests, 105/230 MB Bernoullis, and 250MB QIC tapes. All of which are probably as likely to stay around as a 727. Mostly they will stay around because there are so many of them. New "standards" are likely to be (IMHO): 230MB MO disks, Travan tapes, Iomega JAZ (1GB) drives, and the ZIP. Regarding "getting things from clients"-- my experience is that you will get things in every format from 9-track tapes to CDROMs to boxes of floppies. Quite frankly, I would not worry about it unless I was going to work long-term over multiple projects with the same client. Otherwise I would go with the ZIP and cut a deal with a local computer shop (or Service Bureau) for a deal on tranferring stuff from whatever the customer has to whatever you have. Regards, Grant Hogarth BTW-- the ZIPs were hard to get because they were so popular. Iomega got caught flat-footed. Amazingly, they did not jack up their prices, nor did they allow their distributors to do so! Kudos to an (increasingly rare bird) ethical company!! =================================== Grant Hogarth, Information Services Manager Onyx Graphics Corp. Midvale, UT #include Good editing is like tact. Nobody notices it unless you don't have it. --Bonnie Nestor ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 15:39:02 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Neva J. Smith" Subject: Relinquishing copyright: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? In-Reply-To: <199509252028.PAA16223@zoom.bga.com> In some cases, the indexer has *not* relinquished all rights to the publisher. (See Dick Evans' note below.) I know this is true becuase I specify in my contracts that I convey only the first print rights to the index, unless other arrangements are made and included in the contract. Specifically, I explicitly retain all electronic copyright in the indexes I write. When the publisher wants to sell the index to a database vendor or other electronic service, I expect to receive a royalty. 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 On Sun, 24 Sep 1995, Richard Evans wrote: > It's nice you're concerned, but your obligation lies solely with the > publisher, who owns the index. The indexer relinquished all claim when the > index was turned over to the publisher. > > Do it, don't worry about it. > > Dick Evans > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 14:17:12 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kari Bero Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright In-Reply-To: <199509252039.PAA15426@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> It seems the copyright of our works still isn't quite understood? Even by us professionals? Yikes! My understanding was that indexes are considered creative works (like works authors create). And that as such, we authors own the copyright unless we specify in writing that (1) the work will be considered a work made for hire, or (2) that copyright will be given to the publisher. The question is, what is the _legal_ answer to this? Nancy Mulvany says pretty much the same thing in _Indexing Books_. Nancy, is there legal backing for this concept? -Kari %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Kari J. Bero Bero-West Indexing Services 206-937-3673 3722 Beach Drive SW, Suite 101 bero@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu Seattle, WA 98116 http://alexia.lis.uiuc.edu/~bero/ %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 15:45:46 -0500 Reply-To: becohen@prairienet.org Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Barbara E. Cohen" Subject: Re: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? I agree that scanning an index and changing page numbers never saves time. I have found that in order to have any confidence that the index is consistent and 100% correct, it makes more sense to rekey the entries, even if I use the old index as a guide. (I have found--more often than not--that the old index was not up to snuff, contained inconsistencies, or was generally not rigorous enough, so I no longer agree to "stick to the old index." If I am being hired to index the book, I want to feel confident that the final index is MY best effort. I will agree to use the old index as a guide, as I said, and it can be useful as a starting point. I think that I have come to believe that any editor who might ask me to stick to the old index rather than start from scratch does not understand that I must perform the intellectual analysis necessary to add the new material into the index by re-indexing the old material anyway. No shortcuts there! I try to use this sort of query to educate the editor about what is involved, rather than just saying no. I have to admit that revised indexes are not my favorite thing to do, but they can be a good beginner's project, if the old index is a good one. I'd be interested in hearing how other people feel about this issue, not just from the moral and legal stance (which should be clear from the copyright). Barbara -- Barbara E. Cohen Indexing & Editorial Services ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 14:07:35 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Emily Cikovsky Unsubscribe Emily Cikovsky. Emily Cikovsky ******************** 506-2099, 506-1361 FAX Product Manager * CoAuthor ConText * 500 OP, 5th floor, #528 Text Server Division ******************** Oracle AAA Analogies - we know what it's like. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 18:47:20 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Scanning indexes: moral d... I, for one, do not "revise" indexes. I've made up indexes for many second or later indexes of books, but I am always responsible for the index for the new book, since they are hiring me to do it. My clients know that I would like the index of the previous edition for my own use as I work. I have never been asked to stick close to the old index (maybe I'm just lucky there!), nor have I ever scanned and worked from that (or, worse, re-keyed). More often than not, the previous index contains errors, inconsistencies, and stuff that I simply wouldn't put into my index. I use it to nudge my thinking sometimes, in terms of suggested headings, or to see the level of detail in the previous edition, assuming that that is what is desired now. But I never use it as the basis for my own work. As Barbara said, the intellectual analysis that goes into producing an index is mine, and the product will reflect that. That is really the only way I can work. To use the old index as a basis for the new would be to reduce the indexing to the clerical task of changing page numbers. Once, and only once, did I do an engineering standard for a professional society, where the original index was a well thought out, brief, excellent index -- and the society knew it. All they wanted me to do is to index pages CXX through CYY and a few more, and add that information into the already existing index. This I did for them, at an excellent hourly rate. A short job for someone who was already a client, and one for which I didn't feel at all shortchanged or put upon. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 18:05:07 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: Indexing in la-la land .... In-Reply-To: <199509252017.NAA28807@callamer.com> Lori, that was HYSTERICAL! Not your fall, of course. That must have been miserable...and STILL feel pretty rotten. But your index was superb. Best wishes for a speedy recovery. And aren't you glad you didn't damage your typing hand[s]? |==========| | Sonsie | |==========| ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 18:08:37 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? In-Reply-To: <199509252041.NAA27959@callamer.com> Neva, I occasionally don't sign contracts at all with clients, but when I do, I've never had much of a choice about the wording. I am doing a work for hire, and I relinquish all rights to the project. And, since nothing I've done is likely to end up in an electronic database (at least, not anything I've done thus far), I've never considered rights a big issue. The kind of work you're doing must be in a different area of indexing, where it's worth haggling over copyright ownership. More power to you! |==========| | Sonsie | |==========| ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 11:32:07 EST Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Joan Jensen Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright > My understanding was that indexes are considered creative works (like >works authors create). And that as such, we authors own the copyright >unless we specify in writing that (1) the work will be considered a work >made for hire, or (2) that copyright will be given to the publisher. I am not sure what is the situation in the US, but yesterday in Canberra, Australia, I attended a seminar on Intellectual copyrights. A question was asked, not about the ownership of indexes, but of course material prepared to teach at a university. The ruling given was that the contract should include a clause to cover this. If I have been hired (and am not a full time member of university staff) to develop a subject and to teach that subject and there is nothing in my contract to the contrary, then I own the material, but the university has the right to continue to use it - even without acknowledging me. Several times I have engaged in short term teaching, but have not been offered a contract (it has just been a verbal agreement and has worked very well). There is nothing to stop one from taking the material and using it oneself either. However, increasingly, universities are now becoming more astute, and are including a clause that says something like - anything developed for them while being paid by them, to be used in their courses, belongs to them. Apparently just because an employer contracts us and pays for us to do a job does not automatically give him the right to the copyright of what we produce - unless he covers himself with a contract we sign. The same thing applies to photographers, so I presume it would apply to indexers. As I said, this is the situation in Australia. Joan ======================================================================= Joan D Jensen Phone: 06 2492994 R.G. Menzies Library Building Fax: 06 2490058 Australian National University Canberra ACT 0200 Australia Be practical! Plan for a miracle every day. ======================================================================= ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 25 Sep 1995 23:26:23 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright Joan, The situation in the States may be similar. I don't know. But I know we *should* know, before somebody gets rich using our products! Some of my clients send me a letter of contract to sign for each index I prepare, which basically says I am preparing the index for this book as a work for hire, and releasing copyrights and ownership to the publisher. I sign the letter and return it to the publisher. I figure that I have no further claim after that. Other publishers, however, don't send anything in writing. The deal is made over the phone, or email, and by verbal agreement, and the next thing in writing may be a purchase order from the publisher, or else the indexer's invoice. In those cases, no mention is made of copyright or ownership. My thinking right now is the subject of subsequent copyright rights and electronic rights is an open field. Cyber-law is in its infancy. I'd like to see ASI take the lead and assist those of us working in the field by making appropriate inquiries and determinations of the legal world and providing some guidelines for our use. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 00:59:13 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ed Nelson Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright In-Reply-To: Janet Perlman ... Your view is, IMO, most reasonable. You're absolutely right that the field is in flux, but it's moving quickly toward rigidity -- in a form that freezes out freelancers as thoroughly as possible. The Copyright Office of the Library of Congress has established a web page, which I've looked at only once. It's most interesting, however. It's made quite clear, btw, that absent any legal provision to the contrary, the copyright of a freelancer's work rests in the freelancer. I do feel, however, that I saw an indication, rather clear, that -- while no indicia is required -- the lack of an indication ("copyright 1995 William Shakespeare") limits the copyright holder's available recompense for violation. "Work made for hire" is indeed just such a "legal provision," even though it clearly (to my mind) contradicts the Act's initial purpose as it's being used today. Struggle to change that is under way. I'm no attorney! The Copyright Office web page, however, is very well worth looking at! I feel all hands should check it out. The American Society of Journalists and Authors (founded about 50 years back as a magazine freelancers' society -- for professionals only) has long held a position that I find most reasonable: Members are pleased to sell to publishers whatever rights the publishers want to buy. But they should be specified. "All rights" is an abomination. And increasingly, publishers are trying to specify not only "all rights," but "in media now in use or hereafter devised"! Or words to that effect. So FIGHT ON. --ed nelson ednelson@ripco.com ========================================== On Mon, 25 Sep 1995 JPerlman@AOL.COM wrote: > Joan, > > The situation in the States may be similar. I don't know. But I know we > *should* know, before somebody gets rich using our products! > > Some of my clients send me a letter of contract to sign for each index I > prepare, which basically says I am preparing the index for this book as a > work for hire, and releasing copyrights and ownership to the publisher. I > sign the letter and return it to the publisher. I figure that I have no > further claim after that. > > Other publishers, however, don't send anything in writing. The deal is made > over the phone, or email, and by verbal agreement, and the next thing in > writing may be a purchase order from the publisher, or else the indexer's > invoice. In those cases, no mention is made of copyright or ownership. > > My thinking right now is the subject of subsequent copyright rights and > electronic rights is an open field. Cyber-law is in its infancy. I'd like > to see ASI take the lead and assist those of us working in the field by > making appropriate inquiries and determinations of the legal world and > providing some guidelines for our use. > > Janet Perlman > Southwest Indexing If you think of anything you feel I might do to help, I'll certainly be pleased to TRY. (No guarantees, however.) --ed ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 08:09:09 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Richard Evans Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? In a message dated 95-09-25 16:57:53 EDT, you write: >Subj: Relinquishing copyright: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? >In some cases, the indexer has *not* relinquished all rights to the >publisher. (See Dick Evans' note below.) > >I know this is true becuase I specify in my contracts that I convey only >the first print rights to the index, unless other arrangements are made >and included in the contract. Specifically, I explicitly retain all >electronic copyright in the indexes I write. When the publisher wants to >sell the index to a database vendor or other electronic service, I expect >to receive a royalty. > >Neva I don't have any sound legal basis for my position, but I have always been under the impression that by default the index was a work done for hire. In fact, one of the discussions at the Montreal conference was about how an indexer can ensure payment and I suggested that the indexer retain copyright until payment was received. The publishers in the discussion unanimously agreed that such a claim was unenforceable. Dick Evans ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 08:09:12 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Richard Evans Subject: Re: Text of Handout In a message dated 95-09-25 23:24:27 EDT, you write: >I used to send a letter with a brochure, but I've found that most new clients >request a resume. Am I the only one bothered by the requirement for a resume? Clients don't ask doctors or lawyers for resumes. I'm not looking for permanent employment. Why is a resume the best presentation for my services? What possible value can a client find in knowing that thirty years ago I operated card sorters for IBM and I can still read Hollerith code on punch cards? I'm no longer using resumes. I present a summary of my indexing experience, a list of my projects for the last year, and a sample index. Dick Evans ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 08:21:47 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Resumes In-Reply-To: <9509261307.AA00262@symnet.net> On Tue, 26 Sep 1995, Richard Evans wrote: > Am I the only one bothered by the requirement for a resume? Clients don't > ask doctors or lawyers for resumes. I'm not looking for permanent > employment. Why is a resume the best presentation for my services? I don't think a resume is necessarily the best presentation of one's services. However, let's face it: Many publishers are pretty conservative. What're they used to? Resumes. Managing editors are used to reading resumes, rather than summaries of one's career. Many editors see a brochure; think, "Oh, yeccch, not another piece of advertising"; and toss the thing in the circular file. I've sent prospective clients just a cover letter summary of what I do. What happens? Many will get in touch and ask for a resume. So, I figure, why not cut out one step (and one more stamp), and send 'em what they want to see. What > possible value can a client find in knowing that thirty years ago I operated > card sorters for IBM and I can still read Hollerith code on punch cards? I have about three different versions of my resume in my computer. Each emphasizes a different aspect of my work experience. I keep hearing that one shouldn't go back more than ten years on a resume. Well, no matter which resume I send out, it goes back to 1978, when I first became involved in publishing. I want prospective clients to see how long I've been involved in the field. I title the work section "Relevant Work Experience." I don't bother to include old jobs that aren't relevant. Just my $.02. Hazel P.S. (Regarding doctors and lawyers: Check out the diplomas and other stuff on the wall. Doctors and lawyers want you to know where they studied, what honors they've been awarded, what their specialties are, and the like. And I'll bet we pick a doctor or a lawyer much the same way that publishers pick us: Somebody recommended the M.D. or the J.D. to us.) Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "Shake and shake / The catsup bottle. / None will come, / And then a lot'll." --Richard Armour ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 08:07:41 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright In-Reply-To: <9509260731.AA29282@symnet.net> I haven't been following the whole thread on relinquishing copyright, so I apologize if I'm repeating something that someone else has said. Now here's a pet peeve of mine: I've gone ahead and indexed a book for a publisher. The book appears: a nice, big, hefty hardbound. The publisher credits me as the indexer. All fine and dandy. And then a year later, I see the same book in a bookstore, this time as a paperback. With my index in it, of course. And my name's still there as the indexer. Hey, folks, I'd like to be paid again, since you turned this into *two* books without telling me about it beforehand! I took a course in copyright law when I was in law school. But that was back in 1984. Do I remember anything about the course? Nope. Has copyright law changed since then? Probably. End of peeve (peef?). Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "Shake and shake / The catsup bottle. / None will come, / And then a lot'll." --Richard Armour ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 08:36:21 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Resumes On Tue, 26 Sep 1995, Richard Evans wrote: > Am I the only one bothered by the requirement for a resume? Clients don't > ask doctors or lawyers for resumes. I'm not looking for permanent > employment. Why is a resume the best presentation for my services? I don't think a resume is necessarily the best presentation of one's services. However, let's face it: Many publishers are pretty conservative. What're they used to? Resumes. Managing editors are used to reading resumes, rather than summaries of one's career. Many editors see a brochure; think, "Oh, yeccch, not another piece of advertising"; and toss the thing in the circular file. I've sent prospective clients just a cover letter summary of what I do. What happens? Many will get in touch and ask for a resume. So, I figure, why not cut out one step (and one more stamp), and send 'em what they want to see? What > possible value can a client find in knowing that thirty years ago I operated > card sorters for IBM and I can still read Hollerith code on punch cards? I have about three different versions of my resume in my computer. Each emphasizes a different aspect of my work experience. I keep hearing that one shouldn't go back more than ten years on a resume. Well, no matter which resume I send out, it goes back to 1978, when I first became involved in publishing. I want prospective clients to see how long I've been involved in the field. I title the work section "Relevant Work Experience." I don't bother to include old jobs that aren't relevant. Just my $.02. Hazel P.S. (Regarding doctors and lawyers: Check out the diplomas and other stuff on the wall. Doctors and lawyers want you to know where they studied, what honors they've been awarded, what their specialties are, and the like. And I'll bet we pick a doctor or a lawyer much the same way that publishers pick us: Somebody recommended the M.D. or the J.D. to us.) Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "Shake and shake / The catsup bottle. / None will come, / And then a lot'll." --Richard Armour ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 08:38:56 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Copyright stuff I've tried to send this message twice already, and it keeps bouncing back to me. Hope it makes it to the list at some point. Here goes: I haven't been following the whole thread on relinquishing copyright, so I apologize if I'm repeating something that someone else has said. Now here's a pet peeve of mine: I've gone ahead and indexed a book for a publisher. The book appears: a nice, big, hefty hardbound. The publisher credits me as the indexer. All fine and dandy. And then a year later, I see the same book in a bookstore, this time as a paperback. With my index in it, of course. And my name's still there as the indexer. Hey, folks, I'd like to be paid again, since you turned this into *two* books without telling me about it beforehand! I took a course in copyright law when I was in law school. But that was back in 1984. Do I remember anything about the course? Nope. Has copyright law changed since then? Probably. End of peeve (peef?). Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "Shake and shake / The catsup bottle. / None will come, / And then a lot'll." --Richard Armour ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 08:49:34 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Seth A. Maislin" Subject: Resumes In-Reply-To: Richard Evans "Re: Text of Handout" (Sep 26, 8:09am) I'm the same way: sending indexing (or, more generically, freelance) experience instead of producing the "standard resume" with purpose, education, special skills, etc. On the other hand, I think the difference is a semantic one. The whole purpose of a resume is to present the background, skills, and experience that one has in order to accurately and positively represent oneself for a particular purpose, such as indexing. I find that the most effective indexing "resumes" are those that list books that I have indexed, clients that I have worked for, any classes or training sessions that I have attended, and the particular non-publishing fields in which I feel I have an advantage over other indexers. (As an example of this last one, I could talk about my engineering background. whereas someone else may list fluencies in languages other than English.) And as far as I am concerned, this is still a resume, even if it doesn't say "purpose" at the top. If a client really wants answers to questions that may seem irrelevant, can it hurt them to ask for that information specifically? More often, I think, clients just want something on paper that they can show to somebody else -- or to use to compare freelancers when they have the time to do so. - Seth ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 07:54:10 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Tom Dye Subject: Unsubscribe Please unsubscribe Tom Dye. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 08:54:25 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lynn Moncrief Subject: Re: Translation Issues and Indexes In a message dated 95-09-25 23:45:17 EDT, Neva wrote: >I agree that the index shouldn't be tanslated as embedded tags. Seeing the >structure is important. I think it would help the translator get a feel >for the complete concepts involved, whereas if terms were added as the tags >were encountered, the translation may not cover the entire concept >accurately. >From what you and Jan wrote about translating embedded indexes, I'm really blown away. I thought that the translators used the hard copy of the entire index that I always generate to work with (where they can see the structure) in addition to the context provided by the text surrounding the tag itself. Silly me. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 08:28:24 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Neva J. Smith" Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? In-Reply-To: <199509261210.HAA18225@zoom.bga.com> Just a short addition to my previous comments: The contract I used was based on/inspired by the suggested ASI contract. It's available from the ASI office. (Watch out Bobbie, they'll be knocking your door down!) For those interested in intellectual property and copyright, try the cni-copyright list at cni.org. 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: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:36:25 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Text of Handout Dick, Hazel, Nan, Janet-- your comments about resumes/marketing materials are really apropos. I've gotten to using something that I call a "resume", but may be a "CV" or something else, for all I know. (I gave up keeping different resumes for differnet potential clients, and jsut do up-to-date/appropriate lists of titles indexed in my cover letters) It's more a resume for my indexing services, not for me, if that makes any difference. The main categories are "Freelance Indexing Services," "Current Clients," and "Indexing specialties." Below that I list stuff like my employment history, education, and professional memberships. Anyway, the comments are really hitting a nerve--clearly, it's time to reexamine my "marketing ways," thanks! I too feel a twinge of annoyance when asked to supply a resume. Indeed, as Dick said, we're not applying for employment, we're bidding for subcontracts and marketing our services, no?! I think I'll be merging my resume into some sort of brochure or professional description of my indexing services. (more the later after your comments, Hazel, thanks) good question, Janet! Pilar ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:48:08 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: s mckittrick Subject: standards in indexing As a graduate student in Library and Information Science I am enjoying this discussion group. For a project I am looking at index variations in the health fitness field. Would any of you direct me to your association's examples of excellent indexes in this field? Do you have favorite Publishers in the health fitness field that set high standards in indexing? Thank you for your input, Sharon McKittrick vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv Sharon McKittrick 317-352-0615 ssmckitt@velcome.iupui.edu ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:55:08 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Neva J. Smith" Subject: Re: standards in indexing In-Reply-To: <199509261447.JAA01142@zoom.bga.com> Sharon writes [judiciously snipped] > For a project I am looking at index > variations in the health fitness field. Would any of you direct me to > your association's examples of excellent indexes in this field? (AHA! This looks like an opportunity to post the new ASI Web Page address again!) Sharon, there are some medical texts listed in the Wilson Award section of ASI's web page. Official Blurb follows: The American Society of Indexers has established a Web site of resources for indexers, publishers, authors, and others interested in indexing. Coverage includes software, indexing course information, meetings, and reference tools for indexers, among others. _____________________________________________ _________| The official ASI Home Page is now located |________ \ | at the following URL: | / \ | | / > | http://www.well.com/user/asi/ | < / |_____________________________________________| \ /________) (________\ You can contact ASI via e-mail: asi@well.com I wish I could add additional examples, but medical indexing isn't one of my (current) specialties. > Thank you for your input, > Sharon McKittrick > vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv > Sharon McKittrick 317-352-0615 ssmckitt@velcome.iupui.edu > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You are welcome. Neva Smith > = - * - = < = > = - * - = < = > = - * - = < = > = - * - = < = 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: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 10:27:43 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ed Nelson Subject: Re: Text of Handout In-Reply-To: On Tue, 26 Sep 1995 PilarW@AOL.COM wrote: > Dick, Hazel, Nan, Janet-- > > your comments about resumes/marketing materials are really apropos. > I've gotten to using something that I call a "resume", but may be a "CV" or > something else, for all I know. [ .... ] It strikes me that folks objecting to the idea that they're called on to provide "resumes" to prospetive clients may be concerned about "a nothing." It seems to me most likely that these requests are simply from individuals who feel they've hit upon a catch-all term for a description of a prospective freelance supplier's background and experience. I spent some years doing resumes professionally -- and would like to assure folks that the seemingly rigid requirements for components of such an instrument are largely fictional. So shipping off the sort of descriptions we see is just fine. And if the shipper chooses to call it a resume -- or chooses *not* to -- doesn't make a whole lot of difference. Good luck to *all* of 'em! --ed ednelson@ripco.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:05:52 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright In-Reply-To: <199509260328.UAA11231@callamer.com> Janet, we DO own the rights to our indexes...unless we've signed them away as a work for hire, or made other arrangements. And we definitely should be charging enough for our work to cover this contingency. However, unless you're working on something unusual, it's unlikely that the rights to a textbook index, for example, are going to be worth much without the book itself. You can't resell the index like you could resell a story you've written, so the point of who has ownership, in a practical sense, is probably moot. I think it would be extremely helpful if the ASI published a statement on this issue, and included a paragraph we can attach to our contracts (when we even have them) to that effect. It would certainly help in negotiating better rates if the publishers know that we know just what it is we are negotiating for. And it's not just a fee for work done...it in reality includes all rights to the end product (if we're being asked to create a work for hire or to give up our copyright to the publisher). |==========| | Sonsie | |==========| ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:12:21 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright: Scanning indexes: moral dilemma? In-Reply-To: <199509261210.FAA13028@callamer.com> Dick, how nice for the publishers, to be able to declare we have no rights to our own work and thus can't hold them over a non-pauyer's head! And how very WRONG they are. Unless you have signed a work-for-hire contract, or have fulfilled some very specific IRS rules regarding that practice (rules which most freelancers, by their very definition, do not meet), you are NOT an employee of the publisher and your work is NOT automatically done for hire. Thus, it does NOT belong to the publisher unless you have signed a contract to that effect. |==========| | Sonsie | |==========| ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:17:05 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright In-Reply-To: <199509261229.FAA19885@callamer.com> Hazelo, you've just cited one of the few cases where battling it out over copyright (which, BTW, you own unless you've sold it to the publisher) makes sense. If your work is used, en toto, in a new edition of the book, you OUGHT to receive some sort of fee. Now the question I have is if the book is transformed into a paperback, doesn't that mean the pages almost HAVE to have been renumbered? And who did they hire to change the page numbers in your index? If not you, who? And how much did they pay for this job? And why didn't YOU get the money? |==========| | Sonsie | |==========| ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 09:14:35 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: Text of Handout In-Reply-To: <199509261210.FAA32696@callamer.com> I think many of us who say we are using "resumes" really mean more of a listing of current indexing experience, not a curriculum vitae that goes all the way back to 1969. At least, that's what I'm using. I do mention that I have worked as a production editor, in-house, for a publishing firm because it gives me a little more authenticity. I also give an updated list of selected projects, plus other publishing experience. But my first secretarial job while attending college? No way. It's not germane to the current issue, which is finding freelance indexing work. |==========| | Sonsie | |==========| ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 11:28:31 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Larry Harrison Subject: Re: machine indexing horror story Bob Krovetz wrote: >We are not yet at >the point of fully-automatic high quality back-of-the-book indexing, >but that doesn't mean that such efforts should not be supported. >The comparison with creationism is unwarranted. I agree that legitimate, serious efforts to improve automatic indexing should be supported, but the examples cited from the modem manual do not deserve respect or support. Perhaps the comments from Kevin would be better accepted if they are understood to apply to the *use* of machine-generated indexes by penny-pinching publishers who do not even have a knowledgable editor look at the output before slinging it out the door. Hence, the analogy is appropriate to *creationISTS* rather than creationISM. Larry Harrison (larryh@millcomm.com) 507/280-0049 Freelance book indexing Rochester, Minnesota * Don't believe the Mac bigots who say the Mac has had all the * * Win 95 features since 1984. It had to be ... 1987, at least. * ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 13:14:28 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Gale Rhoades Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright Kari Bero wrote: >> The question is, what is the _legal_ answer to this? Nancy Mulvany says pretty much the same thing in _Indexing Books_. Nancy, is there legal backing for this concept? << Nancy is not currently subscribing to Index-L so I asked her about this and she asked that I direct interested parties to her article "Copyright for Indexes, Revisted" which is available on the Well in the "Papers" section of the indexing conference: http://www.well.com/user/nmulvany/papers.htm Gale Rhoades ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 13:15:18 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Re: Relinquishing copyright In-Reply-To: <9509261728.AA02330@symnet.net> On Tue, 26 Sep 1995, Sonsie C. Conroy wrote: > If your work is used, en toto, in a new edition of the book, > you OUGHT to receive some sort of fee. > > Now the question I have is if the book is transformed into a paperback, > doesn't that mean the pages almost HAVE to have been renumbered? And who > did they hire to change the page numbers in your index? If not you, who? > And how much did they pay for this job? And why didn't YOU get the money? These are indeed good questions! I have to admit that I didn't look at the paperback closely enough to see if the pages have changed. The hardbound book was an oversized book, as was the paperback. Maybe the page numbers didn't change? Or perhaps (and this is my best guess) the publisher shrank the type size so that things wouldn't change. I don't work for this publisher any longer (no falling out or anything; they just stopped calling), so I have no idea what happened with this project. If they did indeed hire someone to change the page numbers, perhaps they found someone who charged less than I did to do the deed. And perhaps embarrassment caused them to stop calling me. Ah, conjecture and speculation! Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "Shake and shake / The catsup bottle. / None will come, / And then a lot'll." --Richard Armour ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 13:20:15 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: martin dowding r <11mdowdi@MACH1.WLU.CA> Subject: Re: Indexing in la-la land .... In-Reply-To: <9509252018.AA00587@mach1.wlu.ca> I would like to thank Lori for her very funny "index" relating to her recent fall. It was nice to see some levity on a day when I was attempting to establish cross references for the notion of "personhood" among philosophers from the time of Plato to modern times. Martin Dowding Indexer, Waterloo, Ontario ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 13:22:29 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Resumes In-Reply-To: <9509261729.AA02342@symnet.net> On Tue, 26 Sep 1995, Sonsie C. Conroy wrote: > I think many of us who say we are using "resumes" really mean more of a > listing of current indexing experience, not a curriculum vitae that goes > all the way back to 1969. At least, that's what I'm using. I do mention > that I have worked as a production editor, in-house, for a publishing > firm because it gives me a little more authenticity. I also give an > updated list of selected projects, plus other publishing experience. But > my first secretarial job while attending college? No way. It's not > germane to the current issue, which is finding freelance indexing work. I agree with Sonsie. And as someone else (sorry that I forgot to note your name!) pointed out, what a "resume" is is pretty fluid. I'll bet that those of us who send out "resumes" all produce documents that look remarkably different. Basically, I want prospective clients to know about what I'm doing now, what jobs I've had that were in publishing, what degrees I have, what foreign languages I know and how well I know them, what I've published that relates to freelance work, and what professional publishing-oriented organizations I belong to. I include a list of clients, and I'm willing to send a list of my projects, too. No goals and objectives here, folks. (Actually, I read some book that said the whole "Goals and Objectives" thing was "out." I never used it, anyway. "To get a job" was always my crass g and o. Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "Shake and shake / The catsup bottle. / None will come, / And then a lot'll." --Richard Armour ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 14:31:47 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "DoraDunn (Sandy Gustafson)" Subject: Re: Is the time right to take the USDA course? (esp. after Money article) How do you sign up for the course? Where can I get information? Is it correspondence or something I have to find locally (Illinois, Chicago area). Thanks, Sandy Gustafson (doradunn) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:01:19 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: USDA Basic Indexing course In-Reply-To: <9509261931.AA03171@symnet.net> On Tue, 26 Sep 1995, DoraDunn (Sandy Gustafson) wrote: > How do you sign up for the course? Where can I get information? Is it > correspondence or something I have to find locally (Illinois, Chicago area). Write to USDA Graduate School Correspondence Program Ag Box 9911 South Agriculture Building, Room 1114 14th Street and Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20250-9911 or call 202-720-7123. This is a correspondence course, so you don't have to be in the D.C. area to take it. Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "Shake and shake / The catsup bottle. / None will come, / And then a lot'll." --Richard Armour ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 15:16:34 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sulochana Ravi Subject: USDA Basic Indexing course I DID it! Two weeks ago I wrote my final exam for this course and heaved a big sigh of relief. It was not easy, believe me. With a fulltime (shaky and demanding) job, a demanding husband (Has to have a home cooked meal) and a demanding 12 year old with so many activities, I was skeptical when I signed up whether I will be able to complete it or not but I did. and I am happy about it. I enjoyed the course very much. It is very well organised and is very challanging. my only complaint is about not getting the graded lessons back early. By the time you get your lessons, you are already into completing the next lesson and you do not even have time to take a look at your returned lessons. I hope USDA takes this into consideration and try to speed things up by faxing the lessons. You also have to remember that the Course Instructor is also a human being like us and is a fulltime indexer and has guests, sickness, family crisis etc. etc. Thanks for listening. Got to get back. But Pl. remember No TV, no friends, no entertainment and no gossping for one year until you finish the course. Good Luck and enjoy. Sulo Ravi ravis@battelle.org ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 16:30:39 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: PilarW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Text of Handout Ed, Hazel, Sonsie -- Thanks for the reassurances, folks! I thought I was doing something "wrong" there for a while... I think I'll leave my 'resume' (or whatever!) basically alone, now. Pilar ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 17:35:24 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Paul G. Swindlehurst" Subject: Re: Unsubscribe >Please unsubscribe Paul G. Swindlehurst > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 26 Sep 1995 19:51:39 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carolyn Weaver Subject: Re: Text of Handout In-Reply-To: <9509261209.AA03052@carson.u.washington.edu> I have TWO resumes: a librarian-type resume showing all my professional experience/memberships/committees/publications since I graduated from library school back in the dark ages B.C. (Before Computers), and an indexing resume, which is limited to my indexing credentials/academic degrees, indexing & library experience. The two are NOT interchangeable. I do consider my 30 years' experience as a medical librarian relevant to my expertise as a medical indexer (since my degree is in English) and my Masters in Public Administration relevant to somebody who's looking for an indexer of business/public administration materials; so my library experience/academic credentials are BRIEFLY summarized in the indexing resume, along with a list of my clients and titles indexed. I've found that my indexing resume, coupled with a couple of sample pages from indexes I've done, is an effective marketing tool. Cold letters without enclosures get ignored; the resume and samples generate phone calls. So it definitely works for me. Potential clients DO want a professional's 'resume', whether they call it that or not; they simply call the library for the information or come in to consult the directories, rather than asking the professional for them directly. People want to know where professionals went to school, their specialty, licensure date, type of practice, length of time in practice, address, phone number, and all the other information contained in a typical resume. And many people pick professionals based on those directory listings. So I don't consider it at all unnerving to be asked for a resume; but I'm careful to send the one appropriate for the person asking. Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, Wa. e-mail: cweaver@u.washington.edu voice: 206/930-4348 On Tue, 26 Sep 1995, Richard Evans wrote: > > Am I the only one bothered by the requirement for a resume? Clients don't > ask doctors or lawyers for resumes. I'm not looking for permanent > employment. Why is a resume the best presentation for my services? What > possible value can a client find in knowing that thirty years ago I operated > card sorters for IBM and I can still read Hollerith code on punch cards? > ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 06:17:00 BST-1 Reply-To: hcalvert@cix.compulink.co.uk Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hilary Calvert Subject: scanning indexes I agree - not worth using the old index and changing the page numbers. What I DO do, however, if I can get hold of a file containing the index, is to strip the page numbers from the old index and load it into Macrex as the basis for the new index. I won't necessarily use the old headings, but they're there if I want them - and prompt me for headings I might otherwise forget. When I finish the index I remove all the entries without page numbers, being careful to retain the cross-references! If anyone's interested I can give details. Drusilla ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 08:44:00 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Karen Wierucki Subject: Re[2]: Unsubscribe Please unsubscribe Karen Wierucki. Thanks! wierucki@ontla.ola.org ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 10:06:04 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Joan Stout Subject: Accuracy in indexing This caught my eye in the 26Sep95 edition of The News & Observer, Raleigh, North Carolina. (BTW, this comes from a column called "Under the Dome and is written somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Also, this newspaper is *not* known for being a fan of Jesse Helms!) "Helms did what? You'll never guess what the liberal media elite is accusing U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms of now. Helms, according to the new memoir by Ben Bradlee, former executive editor of The Washington Post, was one of the conspirators in the Watergate cover-up. And, if Bradlee's book is to be believed, Helms did this before he became a member of Congress in 1973. In his book, Bradlee includes parts of the infamous tapes of Richard Nixon and his aides in the Oval Office. In one excerpt, Nixon and one of his aides refer to someone named Helms while talking about the cover-up. The book also quotes a memo that reporter Bob Woodward wrote about a meeting with his source, Deep Throat. The memo also refers to someone named Helms being involved in the Watergate cover-up. According to the book's index, the Helms in question is Jesse Helms. But as anyone familiar with Watergate knows, the Helms in question was Richard Helms, who was then the director of the CIA." Joan Stout sasjcs@unx.sas.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 10:49:36 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Re: Accuracy in indexing In-Reply-To: <9509271535.AA09053@symnet.net> I knew it, I just knew it. That Jesse Helms is one wild and crazy guy! Speaking of wild and crazy guys: Let's hear it for Immanuel Kant. I'm indexing a book on Kantian consequentialism. I'd tear out all my hair, but I've had it cut so short, that hair-tearing is well-nigh impossible. I think I need a punching bag. Aaaaaaaarrrrrrrrggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Hazel :-{ Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "People call and say, '[Opossums]'re ugly.' And I say, 'You might be ugly, too. But that doesn't mean I can have you eradicated.'" --Ellen Plachter (Wildlife Care Center, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 11:25:48 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Larry Harrison Subject: Re: Accuracy in indexing Joan Stout wrote: >This caught my eye in the 26Sep95 edition of The News & Observer, >Raleigh, North Carolina. (BTW, this comes from a column called "Under >the Dome and is written somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Also, this newspaper >is *not* known for being a fan of Jesse Helms!) ... >You'll never guess what the liberal media elite is accusing U.S. Sen. >Jesse Helms of now. > ... >According to the book's index, the Helms in question is Jesse Helms. Sounds like another case of a lawsuit for defamation of character waiting to happen. Larry Harrison (larryh@millcomm.com) 507/280-0049 Freelance book indexing Rochester, Minnesota * Don't believe the Mac bigots who say the Mac has had all the * * Win 95 features since 1984. It had to be ... 1987, at least. * ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 11:38:00 CDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Mary Dennis Vernau Subject: unsubscribe Please take me off the index listserv. Thanks! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 13:32:49 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Philosophy books, indexing of I've indexed a few philosophy books, all for the same publisher. That publisher requested that I use the indented style. I'm now indexing another philosophy book (the one on Kantian consequentialism that I mentioned in an earlier posting), this time for a different publisher. The editor has given me the choice of using run-in or indented style. For those of you who index more philosophy books than do I, which style do you prefer to use and why? Many thanks for your help! Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "People call and say, '[Opossums]'re ugly.' And I say, 'You might be ugly, too. But that doesn't mean I can have you eradicated.'" --Ellen Plachter (Wildlife Care Center, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 17:50:54 EDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "C.JACOBS" Subject: print vs CD-ROM >Jean Dartnall wrote: > >When I work at the Information Desk in the Library here, I often >encourage students to learn how to use journal indexes on the >print version first before trying CD-ROM or online versions so >that they are only learning one new process at a time. It also >gives them a better 'feel' for the size and scope of the index I >think than it is possible to get by sitting down to a screen. >What do the indexers for this sort of database think? I think it is a good idea for several reasons. One is that it does give a better feel for what the actual index is. The computer screen allows only a little window into the collection, and to the novice there is very little indication of the structure of the data base. My experience in teaching library school students is that they have little conceptual grasp of the CD-ROM contents or structure. There is a basic assumption that the CD is always a better route for searching, but since they don't really understand the structure, they sometimes have difficulty performing good searches. (This is aside from the problem that some CD-ROM have such poor design or quality control that the print products are better). Students also should be aware of both types of indexes so that they can perform effective searches in various situations. (I get _very_ annoyed with students who say they haven't done an assignement because the CD-ROM was down! ) >From the point of view of a CD-ROM indexer, I feel that the better grasp people have of index structure, the better able they are to judge quality and to make reasonable demands on publishers to produce clean, effective CD-ROMs. We (the indexers) usually need more time to proofread CD products, to improve interfaces, and to do research into how the products are being used (so that we can adjust indexing and structure accordingly). So -- hope these comments help. Christine Jacobs (Montreal, Quebec) incj@musicb.mcgill.ca ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 15:46:10 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: Philosophy books, indexing of In-Reply-To: <199509272107.OAA11111@callamer.com> I prefer the indented, rather than run-in, style for virtually all indexes unless you simply HAVE to save space. It's just easier for the eye to run down the column and find what is wanted. That's also why, when possible, I invert subentries so they don't begin with conjunctions or prepositions. In fact, I leave off the "little words" as much as possible while still maintaining grammatical correctness. It's all in the interest of making the keyword jump up and shout at you as you cruise through the columns. |==========| | Sonsie | |==========| ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 10:10:55 EDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Nan Badgett <76400.3351@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Indexing in la-la land .... Lori, Thanks for sharing your la-la land index -- I like your attitude! And best get well wishes, NAN ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 00:59:50 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Larry Harrison Subject: Re: Accuracy in indexing >Joan Stout wrote: > >>This caught my eye in the 26Sep95 edition of The News & Observer, >>Raleigh, North Carolina. (BTW, this comes from a column called "Under >>the Dome and is written somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Also, this newspaper >>is *not* known for being a fan of Jesse Helms!) >... >>You'll never guess what the liberal media elite is accusing U.S. Sen. >>Jesse Helms of now. quote describing sleazy Watergate behavior snipped... >>According to the book's index, the Helms in question is Jesse Helms. > Yep, it's true. I looked at the book in a bookstore tonight. The index has entries for Helms, Dick and Helms, Jesse. The Dick Helms entry points to a page where Richard Helms, CIA director, is mentioned as Dick Helms. The two Jesse Helms entries point to pages where Helms is mentioned with no first name given. The amazing thing is that both mentions are in a context of the CIA, and one even mentions the Assistant Director in the same sentence, viz. "...Helms and xx...." I don't claim to never make mistakes, but failing to look up the true name of someone referred to as "Dick" seems like a beginner's mistake to me. Makes the "Jesse" error look like omission not commission, too. It's a Simon and Schuster book. Wierd. Larry Harrison (larryh@millcomm.com) 507/280-0049 Freelance book indexing Rochester, Minnesota * Don't believe the Mac bigots who say the Mac has had all the * * Win 95 features since 1984. It had to be ... 1987, at least. * ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 01:03:47 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Larry Harrison Subject: Re: Windows 95 Kevin wrote: >Actually Larry, I'm pretty impressed with Windows 95. Don't get me wrong, Kevin. I am quite impressed too. Especially by Gates ponying up the dough to license "Start Me Up" from the Stones. Of course, on TV they never let you hear the most apropos lyric: "You make a grown man cry." Never have so many waited so long for so little. Larry Harrison (larryh@millcomm.com) 507/280-0049 Freelance book indexing Rochester, Minnesota * Don't believe the Mac bigots who say the Mac has had all the * * Win 95 features since 1984. It had to be ... 1987, at least. * ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 18:13:52 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Re: Resumes At 13:22 26/09/95 -0500, Hazel wrote: >(Actually, I read some book that said >the whole "Goals and Objectives" thing was "out." I never used it, >anyway. "To get a job" was always my crass g and o. > I'm sometimes called on to define "Goals, Aims and Objectives" when writing course notes. I'm always tempted to say something like.: Goals: to _teach_ Excel. Aims: for the students to _learn_ Excel. Objectives: the students will _know_ Excel. But invariably I have to waste a whole page on elaborate nonsense that the students will never read. Jonathan. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne Blaxland NSW Australia 061-47-398-199 jonathan@magna.com.au Australian Wildlife in the Cheese Shop: "We had some, but the cat's eaten it." ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 11:12:09 LCL Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Frances Mc Kenna please unsubscribe Frances McKenna ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 05:55:03 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lynn Moncrief Subject: "little words" in subentries > In fact, I leave off the "little words" as much as possible >while still maintaining grammatical correctness. It's all in the interest >of making the keyword jump up and shout at you as you cruise through the >columns. > > |==========| > | Sonsie | > |==========| > Sonsie, I agree with you about leaving off the "little words" as much as possible in subentries for the same reasons. (Also, if I include a leading preposition or conjunction in subentries for FrameMaker indexes, I then have to type practically the entire entry over again to force FrameMaker to sort on the next word--a real pain!) So, imagine my chagrin when I received an index back for proofreading from the typesetter and found that all of my entries containing the word "vs." were expanded to "versus". So much for easily scanning the subentry list. In future indexes for this particular publisher, I'll avoid "vs." like the plague. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 05:55:06 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lynn Moncrief Subject: Re: Philosophy books, indexing of Hazel, Do you mind if someone who doesn't index philosophy books chimes in? ;-D Another factor that may govern your decision whether to use run-in vs. indented style is whether you'll need to go to subsubentries. Aside from what Sonsie already pointed out about the difficulty of scanning run-in indexes, being forced to do without subsubs can really cramp your style if the complexity of the subject matter demands them. (And I strongly suspect that Kantian consequentialism is indeed complex. ;-D) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 09:04:34 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Indexing Services Subject: ASI Heartland Chapter Workshop American Society of Indexers Heartland Chapter Fall Workshop EDITING AN INDEX FOR QUALITY AND USABILITY by Lori Lathrop October 21, 1995 10:00 am - 5:00 pm EST Radisson Plaza and Suite Hotel 8787 Keystone Crossing Indianapolis, IN Program schedule: 10:00 - 12:30 program - Editing an Index for Quality and Usability 12:30 - 1:30 lunch 1:30 - 4:15 program continued 4:15 - 5:00 panel discussion - Making Your Mark EDITING AN INDEX FOR QUALITY AND USABILITY This is a hands-on workshop for indexers and editors who want to know how to eva luate the usability, exhaustivity, and quality of an index. The workshop emphasizes concepts of retri evability of information, consistency and usability. Workshop participants will work in groups to evaluate sample indexes and suggest solutions to problems. ABOUT LORI LATHROP Lori has over 16 years' experience as technical writer, editor and indexer for I BM, plus more than 5 years' experience as a full-time freelance indexer. She is a member of ASI, STC, the Boulder Writers' Alliance, and the Rocky Mountain Publishing Professionals Guild. Her book, An In dexer's Guide to the Internet, was published by ASI in 1994. She has also developed and delivered num erous workshops on indexing skills and index evaluation. PANEL DISCUSSION: MAKING YOUR MARK A panel of Heartland Chapter members will lead a discussion on various methods o f marking proofs for indexing. DOOR PRIZE We are pleased to announce that we will hold a drawing for a demo copy of Cindex 6.0. This prize includes a complete manual and was graciously donated by Francis Lennie, of Ind exing Research. Cost for this program includes lunch. Space is limited, so we encourage you to r egister early! Your confirmation letter will include directions to the Radisson at Keystone Crossing . ASI members: $35.00 Non-members: $45.00 Registration at door: $55.00 The hotel has rooms at $89.00/night or suites at $109.00/night. Call the hotel d irectly at 1-800-333-3333 or 1-317-846-2700. Please let the Registrar know whether you will be staying in Indianapolis--there are a number of restaurants in the Keystone Crossing complex, and group outings to din ner on Friday or Saturday can be arranged. All registrations must include payment. Advance reservations will be accepted un til Wed. Oct. 18. Please fill out the form below, enclose a check to ASI Heartland Chapter, and send to: Sandy Topping, Registrar 2508 Pebble Beach Drive Valparaiso, IN 46383-0400 219/462-8853 Between 9/29 and 10/9, please call Diane Worden at 616/349-3624. ________________________________________________________________________________ _____ Name:___________________________________________________________________________ _____ Address:________________________________________________________________________ ______ ________________________________________________________________________________ _____ Home Phone:__________________Office Phone:___________________Fax:_______________ ________ I plan to stay in Indianapolis on _____Friday_____Saturday nights. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 08:46:28 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: "little words" in subentries In-Reply-To: <199509281301.GAA28693@callamer.com> Lynn, your experience with "versus" sounds as if your index got tangled up with a proofreader/editor who adheres slavishly to The Rules about abbreviations. How nice it would be if more people had the intellectual flexibility to realize there is a time for Rules and then there is a time to be smart and work WITH the reader rather than making his or her life more complex. |==========| | Sonsie | |==========| ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 10:32:00 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kari Bero Subject: listservs and personal mail In-Reply-To: <199509281553.KAA01177@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> I would like to echo the appeal made in the last couple weeks about INDEX-L participants not using this forum for personal discussions. I love to see INDEX-L active, as I'm sure we all do. But, in the last month a lot of posts to specific individuals are coming to the list. Reading through so many notes written to other people is getting to be a hassle. I'd like to continue to read this list, but if it means that I have to read other people's email, it's not worth my time. NETIQUETTE TIP: If you begin a post to a listserv with an individual's name, it is probably more appropriate to send email to that individual. Think twice before sending it to the entire list. If you aren't sure how to compose replies to senders of notes rather than to the entire list, contact your network administrator for help. -Kari Bero bero@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 15:36:00 EST Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Marge Coahrant Subject: potential new indexer Hi folks - I'm another lurker on the list, and another potential new indexer. One of the reasons that I am considering indexing is that I have this rosy image that I could read a lot of books and learn a lot in various fields while doing this work. Don't get me wrong -- I'm not saying I imagine indexing would be easy. I've lurked long enough to know better, and I don't mind work. It's just that my passion for books is mostly due to my love of learning (anything and everything), and I was hoping that indexing (or perhaps book editing) would give me the opportunity to be involved, at least to some degree, in a lot of different areas. So my questions are -- Do you find the material that you work on to be interesting and stimulating, or are you so pressed for time that it's impossible to enjoy this aspect? Are you able to work in a variety of areas, or for logistical reasons is it wiser to specialize in a field and stick with it? And finally, can anyone comment on these same questions regarding book editing? Thanks a lot for any input you have to offer. Marge Coahran Burlington, Vermont ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 13:03:58 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: listservs and personal mail In-Reply-To: <199509281822.LAA26533@callamer.com> On Thu, 28 Sep 1995, Kari Bero wrote: > I would like to echo the appeal made in the last couple weeks about INDEX-L > participants not using this forum for personal discussions. I love to > see INDEX-L active, as I'm sure we all do. But, in the last month a lot of > posts to specific individuals are coming to the list. Reading through > so many notes written to other people is getting to be a hassle. I'd > like to continue to read this list, but if it means that I have to read > other people's email, it's not worth my time. Kari, I probably shouldn't be replying by using your name, since this message might be construed as personal, but I'll take that chance! I may be one of the "offenders" who have personally addressed messages to individuals on the Index-L list, when replying to a general post. (I also had some trouble figuring out how to reply to the list and not also CC everybody...so people may have gotten two copies of the same message on occasion.) However, I'm uncertain as to what is meant by "personal" when people are complaining about too many personal messages being posted. I think my replies have been, for the most part, substantive and on-topic rather than chatty little personal comments. But it seems rather abrupt (and also rather cryptic) to simply reply to another poster's comments without invoking that person's name...so he or she actually knows what (and who) it is I am replying to. In other words, I don't believe it makes a post too "personal" if I simply begin it by saying, "Kari, with regard to your post about personal messages, I think...." Rather, it helps you to know what I'm talking about without having to quote the entire message in my post (a personal pet peeve I haven't mentioned on the list). I've been delighted with about 99% of the message traffic here. It's been interesting, substantive, enjoyable, and most of all, I have learned a great deal. The messages that I cannot sensibly reply to, or in which I have no particular interest or expertise, I use my right arrow key to move past--and I'm not especially annoyed, as it only takes a microsecond to do this. But if I'm missing something, or unintentionally offending people, I need some education. What constitutes a message that is too personal or chatty, as opposed to one that is useful or substantive? Is simply using a person's name in your reply consigning that post to oblivion as being too "personal"? I'd appreciate any input others may have on this subject. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 15:19:08 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carolyn Weaver Subject: Re: listservs and personal mail In-Reply-To: <9509282142.AA05242@carson.u.washington.edu> I think the thing to keep in mind here is that whenever a message gets sent to this list, it's going to 2,000+ people, a lot of whom pay for every message they read. So is your reply general enough to be of interest to the whole list, or it primarily of interest only to the original poster? We're all paying, either in $$$ or time, whenever we access ANY discussion list. IMHO, the messages that should NOT go to the whole list are "me, too!" or related to a narrow issue that the majority are not going to be interested in. I would wager that virtually everyone on this list is interested in fees, client relations, solutions to indexing problems, professionalism, how to use particular software (I don't use Framemaker right now; but ya never know...), philosophy of indexing, etc. Even the agendas for upcoming chapter meetings are of interest, since they give us ideas that can be stolen for use at other locations. But if a message contributes nothing NEW to a discussion, is an inside joke, deals strictly with local issues, or is otherwise not of interest to the world at large, it should go to individuals rather than the list. As a rule of thumb, if it's so personal that it does need an inside header, then it probably should go to the original sender only. I really do prefer INDEX-L in its unmoderated incarnation, since messages circulate faster that way. But the downside is that it's up to the participants to moderate themselves. My $.02 worth; now back to work. Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, Wa. e-mail: cweaver@u.washington.edu voice: 206/930-4348 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 18:34:45 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Re: listservs and personal mail In-Reply-To: <9509281946.AA17788@symnet.net> On Thu, 28 Sep 1995, Kari Bero wrote: > I would like to echo the appeal made in the last couple weeks about INDEX-L > participants not using this forum for personal discussions. [I]n the > last month a lot of > posts to specific individuals are coming to the list. At the risk of sounding like an unseeing dolt, I have to say that I have evidently missed the "personal discussions" on index-l. I've seen postings in which person X replies to person Y's specific indexing query, and person X begins his or her posting with, "Y, I'd like to answer your question about. . . ." I haven't construed these as personal discussions. Starting off the posting with someone's name seemed to me to make the message more friendly, and it alerted index-l participants to what question was being answered or what point was being discussed. And if a question that might interest the whole group is being answered, I don't see the problem. My Internet service provider allows me to start each message with, "On Fri, January 13, Oleg Cassini wrote:" (well, you know what I mean). I wonder if that makes me guilty of sending a personal message to someone. After all, I *do* mention a person's name. > Reading through > so many notes written to other people is getting to be a hassle. I'd > like to continue to read this list, but if it means that I have to read > other people's email, it's not worth my time. I realize that everybody's got a different Internet service provider, and they all work differently. Mine provides me with the name of the sender of each message and with a subject line. If it looks like something I don't want to read, I can delete the message without even looking at it. And if I start reading a message that turns out to be something I'm not interested in, I can delete it in no time flat. There's no need to read anything I don't choose to read. > NETIQUETTE TIP: If you begin a post to a listserv with an individual's > name, it is probably more appropriate to send email to that > individual. I don't think this is always true. Take a look at my opening paragraph. Hazel (who does not wish to start a flame war, but who evidently does not recognize a personal discussion when she sees one) Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@symnet.net) "People call and say, '[Opossums]'re ugly.' And I say, 'You might be ugly, too. But that doesn't mean I can have you eradicated.'" --Ellen Plachter (Wildlife Care Center, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 19:03:04 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kevin Subject: Re: potential new indexer Marge Coahran wrote: >I'm a potential new indexer. One of the >reasons that I am considering indexing is that I have this rosy >image that I could read a lot of books and learn a lot in various >fields while doing this work. ..... >Do you find the material that you work on >to be interesting and stimulating, or are you so pressed for time >that it's impossible to enjoy this aspect? You touched on a topic near and dear to my heart. A big YES YES YES to your question about finding the material interesting and stimulating. Not all projects are, of course, but I too have a great love for being on the "steep part of the learning curve". And I find that not only are many of the projects stimulating, but at least once or twice a year a book affects me deeply for some reason or other, enough perhaps to change my outlook on things or even my path in life. Recently a few books I did on computer-related topics have convinced me how easy it really is to write software. Another book I did early this year on game theory also deeply affected me. One I did recently on bioinorganic chemistry has filled me with great hope for the possibility of curing many diseases through a thorough understanding of the underlying molecular processes involved. What I have decided is that it's probably a good idea to try to physically separate the task of indexing the material from "enjoying" it. By this I mean that when I sit down to really work, I try to turn off the "hey this is really interesting" part of my brain and just index the material, which requires a certain degree of aloofness from the act of fully "enjoying" a book. Then on other occasions, I'll lay back on my bed and tell myself "I'm going to read for intellectual stimulation and enjoyment" and not worry about marking it up. I'll have my markers handy, but having not intended to "index" at this time I won't allow myself to be upset when I realize an hour later I read 50 pages and was too busy enjoying to markup any of it! Instead I try to allow myself to "enjoy" thinking about the book when I'm not actually working, say involved in some outdoor activity, or when talking to friends. Believe me Marge, when you're intensely involved in an indexing project, there will be nowhere you can go to hide from your thoughts about the book. This is almost always where I make decisions on things like indexing level for example. Think of it like a "screen capture" thing; file it (enjoyment and a deeper understanding of the material) away when actually working, but bring it back up later. I'm blessed by having a lot of good griends who not only appreciate and respect the value of what I do, but are always asking me about my latest project. Here's a typical conversation: Friend: Hey Kevin what you been doing lately; you still on enzyme chemistry? Me: No way man that was weeks ago. I'm doing a book on meteor-burst communications. Did you know they bounce radio waves off the ionized trails of meteors in the atmosphere, and that after a lot of sophisticated theoretical stuff it turns out that this represents a secure means of communications, because only you and your receivee know the meteor trail you used, kind of like this PGP (pretty good privacy) thing? I hope this makes some kind of sense to you. Good luck Marge Kevin Mulroony ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dyslexics of the world untie! First State Indexing (302) 738-2558 276 East Main Street Indexer@inetcom.net Newark, Delaware 19711 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 17:04:12 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: potential new indexer In-Reply-To: <199509282030.NAA06189@callamer.com> > So my questions are -- Do you find the material that you work on > to be interesting and stimulating, or are you so pressed for time that it's > impossible to enjoy this aspect? Are you able to work in a variety of areas, > or for logistical reasons is it wiser to specialize in a field and stick with > it? And finally, can anyone comment on these same questions regarding book > editing? When indexing, I usually have to read a book differently. I scan, skim, look for highlighted text or other pointers on organization, etc. If I come across a really interesting passage, though, I'll dive in. This depends, of course, on having the time to do anything OTHER than index the book. Short deadlines are the bane of an indexer's life. I've also done plenty of copyediting, which not only allows you to read word-for-word, it actually REQUIRES it. I've gleaned a lot of great stuff out of books I have edited, though I get pretty sick of even the best of them by the time the job is done! If you work on a book you think you would really enjoy reading, ask for a copy of the bound volume. Editors usually get these automatically, if you work for the larger publishers. Indexers, it seems, get left out of the loop more often. Ask! =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 17:28:55 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Sonsie C. Conroy" Subject: Re: listservs and personal mail In-Reply-To: <199509282226.PAA20226@callamer.com> Carolyn, thanks for the thoughtful and intelligent reply. You made some excellent points, which I'll certainly bear in mind. About the only thing I was surprised at was that there are apparently over 2000 members of this list. I had thought there were about one tenth that number...but can't remember where I got that information. And of course I am probably wrong. |==========| | Sonsie | |==========| ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 28 Sep 1995 21:25:47 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Fred Leise Subject: Re: potential new indexer Marge Coahran asked about the material we index. As a new indexer, I've completed indexes for four books on four completely different subjects: history of black music in America, force and statecraft, mysticism in world religions, and eating disorders. I found each of the books to be fascinating, although I probably wouldn't have picked them up on my own. I also learned a great deal from each of them. Admittedly, one doesn't always have time to savor the book, knowing that one must press on to complete the index. So certainly being a voracious reader helps. And then there is the process of indexing itself: I found my brain whizzing along at 300 mph thinking about the subject and its interconnections in a way I never would if I were reading it for "fun." So perhaps I actually got more out of the books because I was really having to think about the subjects. Of course, I'm sure, too, that I'll have my share of books I simply can't stand and can't wait to be finished with. But that's the nature of the business. As for editing, I think the same holds. One needs a great deal of general knowledge and it would probably be only in scientific/technical fields where a knowledge of the field would be important for proper editing. (I've edited in the fields of music, general librarianship, and law librarianship.) IMHO. Fred Leise "Between the Lines" Indexing and Editorial Services