From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 2-SEP-1996 19:46:28.62 To: CIRJA02 CC: Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9608D" Date: Mon, 2 Sep 1996 19:24:21 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9608D" To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 07:37:10 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Joint meetings with other groups The NSW branch of AUSSI just had a joint meeting with the Society of TEchnical COmmunicators, and have had others with the Society of Editors and the Cataloguing group of ALIA (Library and Information Association). I would be interested to know whether other ASI, SI, etc groups have joint meetings, adn with what groups. Please write if there are other groups with which you have held joint meetings, or with which you think we have enough in common that joint meetings would be useful.. Thanks, GLenda. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne, Blaxland NSW Australia E-mail - jonathan@magna.com.au Web - http://www.magna.com.au/~jonathan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I can't make up my mind whether or not to be indecisive. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 06:59:22 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: WMacallen@AOL.COM Subject: Re: INDEX-L Digest - 21 Aug 1... I too am interested in other groups. I am currently taking the USDA course on proofreading, and from some initial research it appears that there is no professional organization for proofreading as there is for indexing. The ASI is soooooo supportive, I thought that proofreaders are loosing out without the availability of such an organization to draw upon. I have 2 questions: 1) How many others are taking the USDA course on proofreading in addition to indexing? 2) Does anyone know of a proofreading organization such as ASI? 3) I'd be willing to collect names of people who are doing both, or who are proofreading, to see if there is interest in talking about this possibility. This listserve and the ASI have been so motivating that I think the idea is worth exploring. Any thoughts? Willa MacAllen WMacallen@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 07:32:32 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Ann M. Fleury" Subject: Re: Florida ASI group? hazel blumberg-mckee wrote: > > I've been away from index-l from some time, so please forgive me if this > question has been asked and answered recently. > > Is there an ASI group or chapter somewhere in Florida or southern Georgia? > If so, please do let me know. > > TIA, > > Hazel > Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) > touch typist in a point-and-click worldHazel, I received a questionnaire in the mail last June asking if I had any interest in participating in a Florida ASI chapter, but have heard nothing since then. Ann Fleury, Librarian and Indexer Temple Terrace, FL ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 08:06:57 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Susan H. Cnudde" Subject: Re: Florida ASI group? In-Reply-To: <199608212343.AA06695@mailer.fsu.edu> from "hazel blumberg-mckee" at Aug 21, 96 07:35:12 pm Hi Hazel. I'm a beginning indexer--taking the USDA course--and I'd be interested in a Florida indexing group. I'm based in Tallahassee. Let me know if you hear more from others. Thanks. Sue Cnudde ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 08:49:16 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Reference sources for Indexers I am re-posting this message in hopes that more people will respond. The results will be printed as an article for Keywords. I will also include many references that are useful to indexers, but might not be mentioned by indexers. Your input will be credited, unless you would rather not have your name used in the article. I am gathering information about the reference sources most widely used by indexers in the areas of medical indexing, legal indexing, science & technology indexing, humanities indexing, social science indexing, and so on. If you have a favorite thesaurus, dictionary, or other reference tool, please let me know. You may respond to me personally. Because I index so many different topics, I , for example, use a series of subject dictionaries that help me with synonyms and hence cross references. If you have something to share, and if you are so inclined, please indicate the strength and weakness of the tool, the publisher, ISBN number and cost if possible, and a brief description of how you use the tool. Otherwise, just the titles would be fine. Thank you. Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 20:23:15 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Locatelli@AOL.COM Subject: Citing sources Here's a niggling technical question. I am creating the entry for a reference source with three authors: "(Author A, Author B, and Author C, 1991)". Two of the author's names appear at the end of pg. 190 and the last name appears at the top of 191. Do I give the entries for all three names the locator 190-191 as it is a single source with three authors, or do I use pg. 190 for the first two names and pg. 191 for the last name? Comments, please. Fred Leise "Between the Lines" Indexing and Editorial Services ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 18:30:52 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Philip and Heather Jones Subject: Proofreading/indexing combination Here's another proofreading question: I'm currently proofreading galleys for a textbook for which I will probably get the index, too. I really like this arrangement, since it makes the index go very quickly. I'd like to know if other people who do this offer a discount to the publisher for a proofreading/indexing project, or is it standard to get paid the same amount as if it were two separate projects? Heather Jones /-----------------------------------------------------------------------\ | Phil, Heather, Doug and Ivy Jones hpjones@rt66.com | | Los Alamos, NM | \-----------------------------------------------------------------------/ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 01:00:04 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: nice indexing quotation I sent a query recently to two mailing lists I subscribe to (one on children's lit and one on Victorian history and literature), saying that I was studying book indexing and would like to hear from authors about their experiences indexing their own works, or having them indexed. (I'm sending a separate message about the results of this question.) I also asked for examples of indexers or use of indexes in fiction, but didn't get much there--Barbara Pym and a character in Kurt Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle. I did get the following nice quotation: >Your indexing query made me think of a quotation I came across not long ago. Perhaps it's well known among indexers, but I'd never heard of it. It appears in a reminiscence by William Thoms in the journal *Notes and Queries* for August 4, 1877 (p. 87): >"John Baynes [an 18th-century lawyer and poet], like all true lovers of books, dearly loved an index; and the mention of his name in the *Quarterly* has recalled to my memory the anathema which he pronounced against every author who ventured to publish his book without that, as he considered, indispensable accompaniment. The awful curse pronounced by the Cardinal of Rheims, as recorded by Ingoldsby, and Lord Campbell's well-known denunciation of all such offenders are very merciful, milk-and-water affairs, compared with what John Baynes pronounced and dear old Francis Douce repeated to me in his grand sonorous voice, with an emphasis which almost made me tremble: > `Sir, my friend John Baynes used to say, that the man who published a book without an index ought to be damned ten miles beyond Hell, where the Devil could not get for stinging nettles.' " Isn't that nice? Helen HSchinske@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 01:00:17 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: scholarly authors on indexes (long) I sent a query recently to two mailing lists I subscribe to (one on children's lit and one on Victorian history and literature), saying that I was studying book indexing and would like to hear (offlist) from authors about their experiences indexing their own works, or having them indexed. There were about 15 responses, so this is a very small, unscientific poll--but the most interesting results were --one scholar had indexed two of her own works and said >I had no idea, I must admit, >that there were _professional_ indexers in the world--anyway I doubt if I'd >have trusted anyone else to understand what was important enough in the >book to subject-index. It was _my_ baby, after all--my first book. --one scholar wrote >I've indexed five academic books (of my own) over the years, including a reference >work with over 1000 pages, and am always surprised when any >scholarly author hires (or has the publisher hire) an indexer. The major >difficulty my colleagues have is always the matter of context and analogy. >Especially in English departments, we don't always use the same WORD for >a concept -- but indexers who don't know the subject are very weak, usually, >at figuring out that (for example) "pacifism" and "anti-war activity" and >"peace organizations" should all somehow be assembled in the same spot in >the index. ***NOTE: I don't think she realized that she was being so rude. The rest of the letter was perfectly sensible and kindly. --one said >I did the index for an anthology of essays I co-edited ...and if I had it to do over >again I would definitely either hire an indexer myself or pay to have the press do it. >Maybe if it had been my own monograph it would have been easier, but the main >problem wasn't deciding on what to include, but rather using the WordPerfect 6.0 index >functions. NOTHING was as straightforward as I was assured it would be, things that I >expected to happen did not, and all in all it took way too much time, and way too >much trial and error. If you're going to do this professionally, either resign yourself to >the old index card system or find an indexing program that works efficiently. >This was a few years ago, so I can't really be more specific. But good luck to you, >and one caveat. As indexing programs become better, more authors probably will be >doing their own. I'd advise you to go forward with both the indexing plan and a >diversifying backup. I'd say a little education is needed. I did what I could by writing individual responses to each of the people who wrote to me, and following up with a general thank-you to the lists, including recommendations of Chicago, Mulvany, and Wellisch as well as the URL of the ASI web site. Sorry this is so long, but I thought it was only fair to give a decent amount of context in what I quoted. Helen Schinske HSchinske@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 17:32:03 +1200 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Simon Cauchi Subject: Re: Proofreading/indexing combination >I'd like to >know if other people who do this offer a discount to the publisher for a >proofreading/indexing project, or is it standard to get paid the same amount >as if it were two separate projects? I quite often get to proofread and then index a book. The publishers who give me this work know and accept that I will be charging them my normal rate for both tasks. From Simon Cauchi, 13 Riverview Terrace, Hamilton, New Zealand Telephone & facsimile +64 7 854 9229 E-mail: cauchi@wave.co.nz ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 02:10:02 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Proofreading/indexing combination I have copyedited and indexed the same book and have always charged standard separate rates for each function. After all, they are separate functions. Leslie Leland Frank Leslie Leland Frank Editorial Services ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 06:22:39 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: WMacallen@AOL.COM Subject: Re: INDEX-L Digest - 22 Aug 1... One last question on proofreading: I've been told that I should contact Peggy Smith, the author of the book on proofreading called MARK MY WORDS. I've tried to research her through the Net as well as through her publishing company. Does anyone know where she's located? I've heard from about 6 people to date. Hope there are more out thee who are proofreading as well. WM ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 08:48:08 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Heather L. Ebbs" Organization: Editor's Ink Subject: Re: Proofreading / indexing combination Heather Jones asked about offering a discount for indexing a book you've already proofread. I say no, but then I charge by the hour, not the project, so if an indexing project goes more quickly for me because I'm already familiar with the document, the publisher pays less. As I see it, my increased speed is the publisher's bonus for hiring me to do two tasks instead of one. Heather Ebbs editink@istar.ca ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 08:49:47 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DP1301@AOL.COM Subject: Re: INDEX-L Digest - 22 Aug 1... EEI published Mark My Words, and you may direct your inquiry to them: 66 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 200 Alexandria, VA 22314-5507 (703) 683-0683 My edition does not include an email address. Deborah Patton Baltimore, MD 410/243-4688 dp1301@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 09:02:10 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Heather L. Ebbs" Organization: Editor's Ink Subject: Re: Indexing fiction Helen Schinske wrote that she had asked for examples of indexes or indexers in fiction. I don't think this is what you meant, but Lucy Ellman's ^Sweet Desserts^ (Virago Press [Penguin], 1988) includes an author-written "index" that is a favourite of mine. I'd consider this an index in fiction, because it doesn't really index the book--rather, it is part of the text, expanding the characters and the humour. It's a story of two sisters, written by one. Some examples of entries: Academic achievements, my, ^see^ Ph.D.; Franny's, ^passim^ Boyfriends, Franny's hand-me-down, ^see^ less of Cat, unforeseeable responsibilities relating to ownership of a, 115 Divorce, ^cut^ your losses and ^go^ to Las Vegas Guerrillas, Sandinista, disinclination to continue correcting the English on pamphlet concerning the, 52 Lady-bird, ^see^ lady-bug. Lady Bug, ^meet^ Lady Bird and so on. Heather Ebbs editink@istar.ca ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 09:51:03 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: REvans4@AOL.COM Subject: Re: scholarly authors on indexes (long) In a message dated 96-08-24 01:13:35 EDT, you write: << (for example) "pacifism" and "anti-war activity" and >"peace organizations" should all somehow be assembled in the same spot in >the index. >> I can understand how one might want to ensure cross references between related topics, but exactly how did the author "assemble them in the same spot?" Dick Evans ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 10:43:35 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Citing sources In a message dated 96-08-23 20:45:27 EDT, Fred asked: > Here's a niggling technical question. I am creating the entry for a reference > source with three authors: "(Author A, Author B, and Author C, 1991)". Two > of > the author's names appear at the end of pg. 190 and the last name appears at > the top of 191. Do I give the entries for all three names the locator 190- > 191 > as it is a single source with three authors, or do I use pg. 190 for the > first two names and pg. 191 for the last name? > Fred, If the three authors of the source are all given within parens (as in your example) with the closing paren on page 191 I'd give the entries for all three the page range of 191-192. (After all, the date refers to all three authors.) It's similar to that niggling thing we occasionally face where a sentence continues onto the next page but the entirety of the reference to the entry being made happens to be on the first page (with the rest of the sentence on the succeeding page being about something else). I don't know about everyone else, but I always establish a page range in those cases, rightly or wrongly. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 10:53:21 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Janet Russell Subject: Re: Florida ASI group? >> Is there an ASI group or chapter somewhere in Florida or southern Georgia? >> If so, please do let me know. >> The latest issue of Keywords lists Susan Overstreet (941-358-8980) as the contact person for Florida and Georgia. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 14:07:12 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Seth A. Maislin" Subject: Re: Proofreading / indexing combination In-Reply-To: "Heather L. Ebbs" "Re: Proofreading / indexing combination" (Aug 24, 8:48am) Sometimes I *will* charge a little less for the book that I've proofread, but only under this circumstance: I'm bidding for a project I don't expect to get and really want. If it looks as if the author is indexing the book, then I know better than to think somebody is all-of-a-sudden going to decide to spend several hundred (or thousand) dollars on an index they weren't planning on. Even though I could generally try to sell them the idea that having an independent indexer write the index is a good idea, I can tell when it's a waste of time. BUT, if I have the time and am interested in the work -- and opening up an opportunity with a client who so far has hired me only for proofreading -- then I'll make them "a special deal" and offer to charge less. If it means more work in the long run, and it's I'm not "throwing away" time that could spent on something more valuable, it's an investment. Sometimes it pays off, and sometimes it doesn't. However, as Heather Ebbs puts it, the client's bonus is also the speed. Sometimes I'll try to strike a bargain between speed and money. Since time is money, it's an easy exchange to calculate. - Seth -- Seth A. Maislin (seth@ora.com) "I hate quotations." --Ralph Waldo Emerson O'Reilly & Associates Focus Publishing Services 90 Sherman Street 89 Grove Street Cambridge MA 02140 Watertown MA 02172-2826 (617) 499-7439 phone (617) 924-4428 (617) 661-1199 facsimile smaislin@world.std.com WWW: http://www.ora.com/people/staff/seth/index.html ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 14:56:44 -0500 Reply-To: becohen@prairienet.org Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Barbara E. Cohen" Subject: Professional vs. Author-generated indexes On the subject of author-generated versus professionally compiled indexes: this is always an interesting topic because there are merits to either approach. I like to think that the best indexes are collaborations between the author (with his or her special knowledge of the subject of the book) and the indexer (with his or her special knowledge of index structures, formats, and publishers' style requirements). I just received a letter yesterday extolling an index I wrote for an archaeological report--the fifth volume in a series--in which the editor says "I plan to lobby hard to have the indexing for all of [the next 5-6 volumes] done by you" because my index had a "professional finish that our other ... indexes lacked." The consistency that a single indexer can achieve over a series of related volumes generally outweighs any lack of knowledge the indexer might have about a particular subject! (And I have a hard time accepting that authors would hire someone without prior knowledge of the subject area anyway. That's a false argument against professional indexers.) So, I hope that the response to the author worried about her "baby" included a statement about how much indexers worry about THEIR babies too! I think that I pay at least as much attention to the index having merit as the author would, as it is something I am creating and hope to be proud of. As for indexers not being qualified, I hope that you mentioned to that author how very qualified and learned most indexers are. As a group, I find the members of ASI (and our affiliated societies) to be well endowed with degrees, to continue training after they become indexers, and to have a wide range of knowledge that can aid the author in developing cross-references and establishing the kind of vocabulary control that, in my experience, authors are more lax about in their indexes. For every author who will never hire an indexer, there are five who are glad that we are available to tackle their indexes for them, recognizing the merits of a professional job well done. Let's not lose heart just because a few uninformed authors disparage our life's work! (They probably don't like what the editor or the designer do with their book either and are sure they could have done better themselves.) Tirade over..... Barbara :) -- Barbara E. Cohen Indexing & Editorial Services Champaign, IL ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 13:29:13 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Conroy Subject: Re: Proofreading/indexing combination In-Reply-To: <199608240032.RAA21824@spork.callamer.com> I fairly frequently am asked to index a book I have copyedited, but I treat the jobs as two entirely separate issues. I don't give a discount because I have seen the book in advance (though it certainly helps me to have a "feel" for what kind of index should be done). I charge my usual rates for both projects, and have never had any complaints. Nor has anybody asked me for a "combined-job discount." =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 17:06:15 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: indexing and proofreading It sounds to me as though it would be a good time to suggest getting paid by the hour. Then, as Heather said (was it Heather? I deleted the message already), you can tell the publisher that they'll get a better deal since you're already very familiar with the text, and the indexing will go quicker. Do people get two sets of proofs under this arrangement, and send the proof-read text back first? I have an address in my memo book for a copyediting discussion list--don't remember where I got it, but it wasn't long ago. (For all I know, it was off the ASI web page!) I expect Willa and others may be interested. If any of you subscribe to this, or have any other info (e.g., my address is wrong, the list has met its demise, etc.) please let us know. The address I have is listproc@cornell.edu, to which you send the message "SUBSCRIBE COPYEDITING-L [firstname] [lastname]". I don't think it has to be caps, but it's entirely possible that it should be an underscore character before the L instead of a hyphen. Helen HSchinske@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 17:54:58 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: GRETTA M KINCHEN Subject: Re: Computer Law Observer In-Reply-To: <199608201545.LAA56347@garnet.acns.fsu.edu> On Tue, 20 Aug 1996 ChallComm@AOL.COM wrote: > ============================ > THE COMPUTER LAW OBSERVER > ============================ > A free service for the Internet Community > > To subscribe, simply send e-mail to ChallComm@aol.com > requesting to be put on the list. > > The Computer Law Observer is distributed FREE each month > via e-mail by Challenge Communications, a legal content > provider, located in Baltimore, Maryland. > > Each issue of The Observer contains an article discussing an > important legal development relating to the Internet and > computer technology in general. The articles are written for > both lawyers and non-lawyers. > > Topics of past issues include: > > Domain Names: Cyberspace Turf Battles > E-Mail Confessions In Court > Electronic Privacy Rights: The Workplace > Electronic Privacy Rights: Police Power > Encryption: At The Limits Of Lawful Secrecy > License Restrictions Can Backfire > Raiding Employees > Who Owns The Software? > Negotiating Purchase Of A Computer System > Negotiating Royalty Agreements In The Information Age > Protecting Software > Privacy: What Is It? > > The Observer appears monthly in the Baltimore Business Journal > and has also appeared in The Daily Record, Computer COUNSEL, > IEEE Computer and the Maryland Bar Journal. > > The Observer is currently written by William S. Galkin, Esq. > . Mr. Galkin is in private practice > in Baltimore, Maryland and has concentrated his legal practice > in the technology area for over 10 years. He is also the adjunct > professor of computer law at the University of Maryland School > of Law, and has recently served as a special intellectual property counsel > for the Maryland Attorney General's Office. > PLEASE SIGN ME UP TO BE ON YOUR LISTSERVE. gmk4456@garnet.acns.fsu.edu GMK August 24, 1996 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 17:58:39 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Indexing and proofreading >Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 09:19:25 -0400 >To: "Indexer's Discussion Group" >From: hazel blumberg-mckee >Subject: Re: Proofreading/indexing combination > >At 06:30 PM 8/23/96 -0600, you wrote: >>I'm currently proofreading galleys >>for a textbook for which I will probably get the index, too. I really like >>this arrangement, since it makes the index go very quickly. I'd like to >>know if other people who do this offer a discount to the publisher for a >>proofreading/indexing project, or is it standard to get paid the same amount >>as if it were two separate projects? > >I've never seen this question before, and I think it's an extremely >thought-provoking one. Thanks for sending it in! > >I don't know what the standard is on this sort of arrangement. I've >frequently copyedited, proofread, and indexed the same book. I've charged >the client as though this were separate projects, which to my mind, it >indeed is. Yes, the index may go quickly, since I'm familiar with the >material. However, more often than not, other projects from other publishers >will come up in between the editing and proofreading and indexing for one >publisher. I'll then forget a lot about what I'd originally copyedited. (Of >course, my husband says I have the original self-cleaning memory! >;-} ) > >Even *if* I've been able to work on each project back to back, there's >another problem involved: I may have gotten so close to the material that I >can no longer view it as objectively as I once could. I start to see minor >points as being terribly important. Were I just indexing the book, without >having gone through it at least once before, I wouldn't have this problem. >So, I'll have to switch off my subjectivity. > >Further, I've done some heavy copyediting when the publishers have requested >it. And sometimes heavy copyediting has required the author to do >substantial rewrites. So, the book isn't the same book I once knew. > >Anyway, just my two cents. > >Hazel > > > > > >Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) > touch typist in a point-and-click world > > Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) touch typist in a point-and-click world ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 18:08:36 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Florida ASI group Thanks to everybody who sent me the addresses of people who're involved in setting up a Florida and a Georgia ASI group. Hope things work out! It'd be nice to have a chapter or a group or a get-together in this part of the world. Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) touch typist in a point-and-click world ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 24 Aug 1996 18:26:16 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Copyediting-l I subscribe to copyediting-l. Here's a bit more info: To subscribe, send the message SUBSCRIBE COPYEDITING-L Your Name to listproc@cornell.edu I believe that the default is to receive the list in digest form. If you prefer to receive single postings throughout the day, send another message to that same address. The message can be either SET COPYEDITING-L MAIL ACK if you want to receive all mail, including your own postings, or SET COPYEDITING-L MAIL NOACK if you want to receive all mail except your own postings. The list is pretty active, so be prepared for a plump e-mailbox. Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) touch typist in a point-and-click world ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 06:52:06 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: WMacallen@AOL.COM Subject: Re: INDEX-L Digest - 23 Aug 1... Re: Peggy Smith I did try that approach, and they did not have information on her. But I'll try again. I was hoping there might be an email address available. Thanks for the tip. WM ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 07:04:16 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: WMacallen@AOL.COM Subject: Re: INDEX-L Digest - 23 Aug 1... 2 more questions (and I should state that I've misplaced my instructions for posting on the listserve. Would it be possible to repost them?) I'm teaching an entry-level class on indexing at Cambridge Center in Cambridge, Mass and have to questions that came up: 1) Someone in class asked the difference between the 13th & 14th editions. Since I have only the 14th edition, I was not sure of the difference and hope that someone who has been indexing awhile can tell me. 2) I noticed in an index done a few years ago (probably late 70's) the phrase Also see. I was curious about what brought the change from Also see to See also. Thanks for any info. WM ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 09:29:32 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Chicago manual of Style On the jacket of the 14th Edition of the Chicago Manual of Style, there is a discussion of the major changes that have occurred since the 13th Edition (more computer-oriented publishing information, language information including Hebrew, an expanded documentation discussion, revised information on copyright and fair use, and how-tos for authors, etc.). In addition, the bibliography has been revised. As far as the section on indexing is concerned, the examples of indexes in the 14th Edition have headings in lower-case instead of upper-case. The other major changes in the chapter on indexing have to do with the use of computers in the indexing process. In spite of this, there is still the detailed attention to the principles of alphabetization. These are the major differences that I have noticed; other people will probably have other comments. >I'm teaching an entry-level class on indexing at Cambridge Center in >Cambridge, Mass and have to questions that came up: > >1) Someone in class asked the difference between the 13th & 14th editions. > Since I have only the 14th edition, I was not sure of the difference and >hope that someone who has been indexing awhile can tell me. Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 10:09:08 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: CMS 13 vs. CMS 14 At 07:04 AM 8/25/96 -0400, you wrote: >1) Someone in class asked the difference between the 13th & 14th editions. > Since I have only the 14th edition, I was not sure of the difference and >hope that someone who has been indexing awhile can tell me. Maybe I'm prejudiced (naw, not *me*!), but I like CMS 13 much better than I do CMS 14. Granted, any style manual is bound to have its problems. However, I think some of the tinkering in CMS 14 has made things awfully unclear and bizarre. There seem to be a number of differences between CMS 13 and 14, in both the indexing and the editing sectors. Take a look at Section 17.16, on page 709 of CMS 14, for example: Calumet People (_see also_ Lakes People) animal totem, 123, 146 clothing, 126-27 This type of _See also_ x-ref with an indented-style index is a newie on me. In the same section, the last two _See also_ x-refs (the main heading is "Maya") also look extremely weird and confusing to me. I think they'd really puzzle an index user. Take a look at CMS 14, Section 17.99, on page 740. I believe that CMS 13 used to tell you to alphabetize a person first, then a place, then a thing. I'd (grudgingly) say that CMS 14's solution makes more sense to the average reader. I think that CMS 14, Section 17.109, page 743, concerning names with "Mac," "Mc," and "M'," is also different from what CMS 13 held. CMS 14 gives you an alternative. CMS 13, I think, was pretty adamant about how you were supposed to alphabetize these. I'm sure that there are more differences. The big difference, I think, is that CMS 14 is more "wishy washy" than was CMS 13. And heaven knows, there are always enough places to waffle when it comes to indexing and editing styles. I think we need more guidance, rather than the laissez-faire attitude that CMS 13 projects. Definitely get hold of a CMS 13, and check it out yourself. Some publishers still use CMS 13. And I know of at least one that's using CMS 12. My overly opinionated take on CMS 13 vs. CMS 14. ;-} >2) I noticed in an index done a few years ago (probably late 70's) the phrase >Also see. I was curious about what brought the change from Also see to See >also. I don't know about that one. I can only hazard a guess that different people have used different sorts of _See also_ x-refs. These _Also see_s may be one person's particular style. Is the index you're talking about in a book that was published in Canada, Britain, Australia, or New Zealand? That might make a difference, but I don't know. Folks who are indexers in these customers, please let us know what the _See also_ style is like or what it once was. Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) touch typist in a point-and-click world ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 12:01:49 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Business expansion This is a question concerning expanding one's business as an indexer. What does one do if (hypothetically) business gets good enough to consider taking on more work than one can comfortably handle? Ideally, there should be someone else available to do typing or other similar steps in the indexing process, thereby freeing the indexer to spend more time than ever on the intellectual process of indexing and not the mechanical process. Could someone let me know what he/she has done in cases like this? For one thing, I am aware that the detailed mark-up of text would have to be done carefully and with appropriate signals to the typist in order that headings/subheadings/double postings, etc., would be included. Please share your strategies, suggestions, and ideas/advice for employment contracts with subcontractors, etc. Thanks. Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 13:16:59 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: REvans4@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Business expansion In a message dated 96-08-25 12:04:12 EDT, you write: << Ideally, there should be someone else available to do typing or other similar steps in the indexing process, thereby freeing the indexer to spend more time than ever on the intellectual process of indexing >> I reached a saturation point last August. I had nine jobs in house and was spending 12 hours a day trying to cope. I was very fortunate that I knew a colleague from my former corporate life who had also left the corporation and was looking for work. She was a talented technical writer, knew computers (my specialty), and had experience with indexing corporate manuals. It was only a matter of teaching her the very basics of CINDEX and setting her to work proof reading and page checking. After the crunch, I had her do data entry for books I had marked up then went on to subcontracting whole projects. Now, a year later, she has started her own practice. (A mixed blessing, because she is somtimes now not available when I need help.) Several months ago, I also found an aspiring indexer who is willing to do proofing and some data entry. As far as I am concerned, the success of taking on apprentices depends on finding someone geographically close who already knows the basics and can get up to speed with a minimum of training. I know some will quibble over the need for geographic closeness, but by the time I get a project the schedule is far to tight to allow a couple of days for addtional shipping. All three of us live in a ten-mile radius and either hand carry or send projects via messenger. Dick ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 14:40:51 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Citing sources I'm with Lynn on this one. That is exactly what I do when this happens to me. Leslie Leslie Leland Editorial Services ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 17:46:44 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: Also see In a message dated 96-08-25 07:06:49 EDT, Willa writes: >2) I noticed in an index done a few years ago (probably late 70's) the phrase >Also see. I was curious about what brought the change from Also see to See >also. I think "Also see" is probably unique to the author of that index. I wouldn't take ANY particular index as authoritative unless you know a good deal about where it came from. Best to work from first principles. For all you know some typist could have thought "See also" looked funny. My two cents. Helen Schinske HSchinske@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 01:47:20 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: Citing sources >Here's a niggling technical question. I am creating the entry for a reference >source with three authors: "(Author A, Author B, and Author C, 1991)". Two of >the author's names appear at the end of pg. 190 and the last name appears at >the top of 191. Do I give the entries for all three names the locator 190-191 >as it is a single source with three authors, or do I use pg. 190 for the >first two names and pg. 191 for the last name? So I take it the reference source comes at the end of some string of text, perhaps even a quote from A, B, and C's book, right? I would give just p. 190 for the first two authors, so the reader won't bother with the next page, on which she or he won't find anything about authors A and B. Then I'd give pp. 190-191 for author C, on the grounds that the person's name is on p. 191, but something about C or what C said is on p. 190. Unlike Lynn, I guess I don't consider the 1991 part as indexable info; rather, it's there to help you locate the entry in the list of references if you need to. I consider those dates significant from an indexing point of view only when I'm being told, e.g., that the book was written in 1981, was suppressed for ten years, and was at last published in 1991. In other words, when the book's publication is itself treated as a subject. I'd be interested in hearing how others out there make the distinction between a citation and a discussion of a book. If you have a bunch of quotes *from* a particular book (so you create an entry for the author and maybe some subs for the content of the quotes) and then some discussion *of the book itself* (say, the impact of the book on the field), what then? In case that's totally unclear, here's a made-up example of what I mean: Blah, blah, and where Descartes talks, in the _Meditations_, about melting wax, he's trying to show blah, blah, blah. . . . [on p. 10} When the _Meditations_ first hit the stores, people misunderstood it and took to believing in an evil genius. [on p. 20] I would treat it like this: Descartes, Rene _Meditations on First Philosophy_, 20 wax example, significance of, 10 _Meditations on First Philosophy_ (Descartes), 20 What you the rest of you do? Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | Life is good. Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | Milwaukee, WI | ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 01:47:29 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: Proofreading/indexing combination >Here's another proofreading question: I'm currently proofreading galleys >for a textbook for which I will probably get the index, too. I really like >this arrangement, since it makes the index go very quickly. I'd like to >know if other people who do this offer a discount to the publisher for a >proofreading/indexing project, or is it standard to get paid the same amount >as if it were two separate projects? Call me Scrooge McIndexer, but no way would I give a discount for that. Whatever edge I have from having worked on the book at an earlier stage (granted, I don't have to read it again), I use that freed-up time to do that much more on the index. I don't do proofreading any more, but I do occasionally copyedit a book that I later index; actually, I don't like it any more, because I get too bored with the book. Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | Life is good. Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | Milwaukee, WI | ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 06:59:42 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: WMacallen@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Mass ASI Directory This is a reminder to members of the Massachusetts ASI chapter that September 1 is this week. That's the deadline to have your blurb in to me if you want to be listed in the Massachusetts Chapter ASI Directory. Thanks. WM ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 07:00:45 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: WMacallen@AOL.COM Subject: Re: 2 questions Thanks again, as usual, for the info re my two questions. I'll pass the info on in class this week. WM ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 10:39:01 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: indexer@INET.NET Subject: Re: Indexing/Proofreading Combination Along the lines of this topic, I've thought about offering clients a cheap "extra" layer proofreading service. It wouldn't be a full proofread, but a more formalized agreement to let them know about mistakes I catch. In other words, instead of what I normally do, which is to let editors know just about really aggregious errors, or all of them if I only catch 2-3, and sometimes none if I find tons, (except to let them know there are lots of mistakes), I would keep a record of all mistakes found and include it with the index. It still wouldn't be a full proofread as my primary concern would be doing the index. I was thinking about charging some nominal fee like $ 100 for this service. Is anyone doing something like this? Oh yeah, I am still alive! I joined a hobby-related listserv and now I get the 50+ e-mails a day people bemoaned a while back when we had the "personal discussions" thread. Now I can relate to their concerns: I've been suffering from e-mail entombment. The only relief has been to remember Pilar's saying she saves little if anything of the "incoming". This is tough as I'm a packrat, but life *is* supposedly tough. [secret message: welcome back Hazel!] Kevin Mulrooney ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dyslexics of the world untie! First State Indexing (302) 738-2558 276 East Main Street Indexer@inetcom.net Newark, Delaware 19711 http://www2.inet.net/~indexer/kjm.html ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 08:23:57 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Robin Hilp Subject: Re: Professional vs. Author-generated indexes There are some authors who are told, "No, we hired you as a full-time writer and we don't expect to pay an outsourcer to index your manuals." I've had to learn indexing, which is a whole different set of skills from tech writing. I appreciate indexers. I just don't have the budget authority to hire/contract them here. robin@microtekintl.com .. http://www.geocities.com/Athens/4537/ .. Robin Hilp .. Mbr DNRC .. Apps Engr .. "Play Me Le Jazz Hot!" .. Mgr STC WVC Indexing SIG .. Homeschool Parent .. Tech Writer .. PerkyGoth .. Aspiring WebMeister .. Margret Bjorn Dottir, An Tir .. Code garbage below or attached is a MicroSoft Exchange "feature"! ---------- From: Barbara E. Cohen[SMTP:becohen@PRAIRIENET.ORG] Sent: Saturday, August 24, 1996 12:57 PM To: Multiple recipients of list INDEX-L Subject: Professional vs. Author-generated indexes [... snip ...] For every author who will never hire an indexer, there are five who are glad that we are available to tackle their indexes for them, recognizing the merits of a professional job well done. Let's not lose heart just because a few uninformed authors disparage our life's work! (They probably don't like what the editor or the designer do with their book either and are sure they could have done better themselves.) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:27:45 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Heather L. Ebbs" Organization: Editor's Ink Subject: Catching mistakes (was indexing/proofreading combination) Kevin Mulrooney wrote, > Along the lines of this topic, I've thought about offering clients a > cheap "extra" layer proofreading service. It wouldn't be a full > proofread, but a more formalized agreement to let them know about > mistakes I catch. I always let my clients know about all errors I catch. Yes, it takes extra time, but very little (if there are just a few errors, I type them up or verbally tell the editor by telephone--both of us with page proofs in hand; if there are many, I return the flagged proofs). Clients appreciate it enormously, and I believe it enhances the professionalism of my service. Indeed, I think that _not_ telling them about errors I notice would give whatever part of me contains my professional ethics a little prickle. And no, I do not charge them a separate fee; I consider it part of the job (however, I charge by the hour, so if I spend a few minutes extra on this happenstance error-catching, the client does pay for it in the long run). And I think I'd have a hard time explaining to clients that I was going to charge them a fee for "sort-of" proofreading; I don't think a client would be happy paying for a service that has no defined level of quality. FWIW Heather Ebbs editink@istar.ca ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 12:18:10 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: xwoods Subject: Re: Indexing/Proofreading Combination I have joined index-L fairly recently, and have been enjoying the discussions immensely. Regarding a recent proposal of a "cheap" indexing/proofreading combination, I can't imagine anything more frustrating than doing a partial proofread, and then documenting my incompleteness in a separate record for the editor. It would take far more time and effort than doing a real proofread, with standard proofreaders' notation directly on the page proofs, and would be far less usable to the editor. I would see this as a truly egregious misuse of time, which might "cost" me far more than $100, and which might be far better spent on the index. I have been curious about some of the comments on this topic which suggest that an indexer could be too close to the text to do a good job on it. Or at least that they might be bored with it or no longer as objective after too many readings of it. I'd like to know whether there are many indexers who have turned down jobs because they feel they could not be objective enough. I would like to hear some of these philosophical war stories. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 13:40:19 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: indexer@INET.NET Subject: Re: Indexing/Proofreading Combination I wrote: Along the lines of this topic, I've thought about offering clients a cheap >"extra" layer proofreading service. It wouldn't be a full proofread, but a more >formalized agreement to let them know about mistakes I catch. In other words, instead >of what I normally do, which is to let editors know just about really aggregious >errors, or all of them if I only catch 2-3, and sometimes none if I find tons, (except >to let them know there are lots of mistakes), I would keep a record of all mistakes >found and include it with the index. It still wouldn't be a full proofread as my >primary concern would be doing the index. I was thinking about charging some nominal >fee like $ 100 for this service. some clarification: I certainly wasn't proposing this as an *alternative* to the task of the regular proofreader. Instead it's just an "additional pair of eyes" and very cheap considering the overall cost of proofreading. The point is to formalize the usual procedure of transmitting the errors to the editor and offer some extra "value in use" for my services. When I am given first pass proofs as in the case of one of my current projects due to extreme project time constraints, minor errors are quite numerous and I don't consider it my duty by any stretch to give a full accounting to the editor. In this project for example I pointed out 2 aggregious ones to the editor and as soon as I mentioned the pages she knew exactly what I was talking about. She said "yeah that's what we hire copyeditors for", and on that basis I don't feel "responsible" for errors. Much of the time however I get final proofs and I enumerate all errors to the editor, usually being less than a half dozen or so. Kevin Mulrooney ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dyslexics of the world untie! First State Indexing (302) 738-2558 276 East Main Street Indexer@inetcom.net Newark, Delaware 19711 http://www2.inet.net/~indexer/kjm.html ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 14:09:42 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Heather L. Ebbs" Organization: Editor's Ink Subject: Turning down jobs The mysterious xwoods (xavier? xerxes?) asked about turning down jobs for philosophical reasons, such as being too close to the text. Besides turning down indexes because of time constraints, I've turned down one index because I believed I was far from the best indexer of its interesting but esoteric and complicated subject matter (a postgraduate-level text on theories of knowledge in different cultures, with each chapter written by a different author; I offered the editor the name of a more appropriate indexer) and one index because the author's opinions were intensely repellent (racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. to an extreme degree). Also, because I don't enjoy them very much, I've lately begun avoiding technical manuals; although I do have a number of high-tech clients for whom I index these types of documents, I'm trying not to take on new clients in this field. Heather Ebbs ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 14:16:09 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Also see One very useful way to use "Also See" is in online indexing and keywords. I use it there instead of "See also" because of WinHelp's complete lack of ability to force a sort order. "Also see" winds up under the main entry, where it belongs. "See also" winds up in the s section of the subentries. I do have to occasionally figure out what to do with subentries that begin with ab-ak, but rewriting them usually works. So you get: Text Also see typography fonts size style x-height Instead of: Text fonts See also typography size style x-height Jan Wright ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 14:16:01 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Charging for proofreading? I agree completely with Heather. I have an "intake sheet," which I use when I'm talking with a client about a project. One of the questions on this sheet is "CORRECTIONS/TYPOS: how to handle?" Just this morning, for example, I was talking with a client about an indexing project she's sending me. I asked her if she'd like me to send her any pages on which I find errors or typos, with the errors or typos highlighted; whether she'd like me to type out these things and submit them with the completed index; if she'd like me to call her from time to time about anything problematic that I find; or whatever she'd prefer. I've had some clients who've requested that I call them collect at the end of every chapter and read them the errors I've found. Some clients like to receive pages with errors marked, either as soon as I've finished reading the pages or with the completed index. Some clients like errors e-mailed once a week. There are a zillion possibilities. I don't charge extra for this service. I feel it's part of my job. Like Heather, I think it'd bother me terribly if I *didn't* alert clients to errors I find. And I love to hear an editor exclaim, "Good catch!" My two cents. Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "I was walloped by the mighty mackerel of memory."--Mark Hinson ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 14:06:17 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Andre De Tienne Subject: Aggregious >[Kevin] wrote: ... In other words, instead of what I normally do, which is >to >let editors know just about really aggregious errors, or all of them >if I only >catch 2-3, and sometimes none if I find tons, (except to let them know >there are lots of mistakes), >In this project for example I pointed out 2 aggregious ones to the editor >and >as soon as I mentioned the pages she knew exactly what I was talking >about. Since the same spelling occurs in two different postings, I thought I would point out the egregious error, even though no editor is going to pay me for this. :) Andre *************************************************************************** Andre De Tienne Tel.(W): 317-274-2033 Assistant Editor Tel.(H): 317-328-8789 Peirce Edition Project, IUPUI Fax: 317-274-2347 CA 545, 425 University Boulevard E-mail: adetienn@iupui.edu Indianapolis, IN 46202-5140 adetienn@indyvax.iupui.edu *************************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:23:46 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Business expansion In a message dated 96-08-25 12:03:43 EDT, Cynthia asked: > This is a question concerning expanding one's business as an indexer. What > does one do if (hypothetically) business gets good enough to consider taking > on more work than one can comfortably handle? Ideally, there should be > someone else available to do typing or other similar steps in the indexing > process, thereby freeing the indexer to spend more time than ever on the > intellectual process of indexing and not the mechanical process. I'm fortunate enough to have family members who can pitch in (depending on the type of projects involved), though I have made referrals to other indexers when the work wasn't amenable to this arrangement. For example, I had seven indexes to get out in less than 10 days recently. (Slipping schedules caused this monstrous collision, BTW.) Three required embedding in FrameMaker. So, on those three, I indexed in Macrex, generated a page-order sorts of the three indexes and had my husband do the actual embedding in FrameMaker while I worked on other books. (We have two computers with Macrex and FrameMaker on both of them which enabled us to work simultaneously.) One book required a name and a subject index. It took only a few minutes to show my daughter and my husband enough of Macrex to make entries for the name index, so I had them pulling shifts while I created the subject index. (My daughter worked while my husband napped from the all-nighters he pulled embedding the other indexes.) BTW, Murphy's Law was operative during this nightmare and we had the nine-state, gigunda power outage that stopped all computer work for three hours (so I highlighted names and marked page ranges on the proofs when not moaning on the phone about it to other folks). ;-D But, even with that many people working, my husband and I were pulling quite a few all-nighters to the extent where I was able to truthfully tell one client that we were working on his book 24 hours a day. (We were also tremendously slowed down by the fact that both of these indexes required annotated--"p." and "pp."-- page numbers that wouldn't merge, requiring constant massaging as we worked.) As a matter of course, whenever any book comes in, my husband vetts the pages and marks page ranges for all headings throughout the book. I work without marking up the pages first, so you won't believe how having the page ranges already marked on the proofs speeds things up. When there are problems with page numbers (e.g., when I received a 900-pp with totally unreadable page numbers or the pages aren't folioed properly), it becomes an all-hands evolution (as we used to say in the Navy) and everyone writes the page numbers on the proofs so I can easily read them. I've even pulled in my mother to help. I had a huge project of 27 electronics manuals to a monster telecommunications system where I had to generate a page-order sort for each manual, cut and paste the entries for each page, then draw arrows from each entry to where it was to be embedded by the client in the electronic files. (Yes, they paid for all of this additional work.) Anyway, I taught my mother and husband how to cut, paste, find where the entries where to go, etc. Since I was able to crank 30-50 pp/hr on these books, I was able to stay well ahead of the cutting/pasting operations and pitch in on that part to keep everything up to speed. (It helped that I had worked on telecommunications equipment in the Navy, so the actual indexing was a piece of cake. It also helped that I did a lot of paste-up work back in the days before desktop publishing so I wield a wicked Exacto-knife.) Now, in terms of business expansion, I taught my husband how to embed in FrameMaker, not only so that he could help out on FrameMaker projects, but as part of teaching him indexing so that I could do a marketing blitz to expand my business. (I also bought another computer system.) The idea behind this is that, by working with the page-order sorts I generate, he is forced to constantly read my entries for specific blocks of text, thus getting a birds-eye view of the intellectual processes involved in indexing--how entries are created from specific text, double-posting, etc. (I also generate an alpha sort so that he can see the index as a whole.) I also had this in mind when I brought my mother in on the cutting/pasting project as she had expressed a desire to learn indexing. (She decided that she didn't want to learn to actually index, BTW, after that. ;-D) I never got around to doing the marketing blitz, but business has been expanding on its own. I do recommend training whoever is going to help you *before* you actively set out to expand your business, if possible. They'll have quite a few questions while getting up to speed on the software. I taught my husband FrameMaker during a slow spell during which I actually wrote quite a hefty thing on how to work in FrameMaker for him to use as a reference. Plus, I put an old FrameMaker project back onto the computer, stripped out all of the index tags, regenerated the page-order sort in Macrex, etc. so he'd have a project to practice with. Things were very hectic when I taught him and my daughter how to work in Macrex, but I already had part of the index up and running, had created keywords and macros they needed, etc., so teaching them how to actually make the entries took only a few minutes. Plus, I wrote up a quick cheat-sheet of function keys, Esc key, etc. Being that you probably aren't thinking of embedding and you work from marked page proofs (which I don't), you'd have to come up with something different in terms of preparing to train someone to help you but you may find something useful from all of this blather about how I've handled these situations. ;-D Good luck!!! Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:47:27 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Steve Johns Subject: indexing school newspapers I would like to solicit comments or experiences from anyone on the list who has been involved in the project of indexing their university newspaper. Did you use a controlled vocabulary? What problems or complications did you run into? I have the impression that there are two ways to proceed. The high-tech route using scanners or software like simdex or CLARIS. Or a low-tech route with a small army of student volunteers, using index cards, and assigning them each a page, topic or year. At this point, we're thinking of indexing it broadly but not deeply. We'd like to capture: names, major events, university offices, college activities, etc. Please reply directly to me, I'll be happy to summarize for the list later, if there is interest. Thanks. Steven Johns Woodson Research Center Rice University johns@rice.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 18:09:24 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: aggregious/egregious > what I normally do, which is to let editors know >just about really aggregious errors, or all of them if I only catch 2-3, and >sometimes none if I find tons, (except to let them know there are lots of >mistakes), Maybe "aggregious" errors would be those that run in herds (cf. aggregate), whereas "egregious" are those that avoid herds, and hide on a page that appears to be perfectly fine, except to the reviewer who finds the howler. Helen HSchinske@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:36:22 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Michael Brackney Subject: Re: Citing sources On Sat, 24 Aug 1996 Lynn wrote: >In a message dated 96-08-23 20:45:27 EDT, Fred asked: > >>Here's a niggling technical question. I am creating the entry for a reference >>source with three authors: "(Author A, Author B, and Author C, 1991)". Two of >>the author's names appear at the end of pg. 190 and the last name appears at >>the top of 191. Do I give the entries for all three names the locator 190-191 >>as it is a single source with three authors, or do I use pg. 190 for the >>first two names and pg. 191 for the last name? > >Fred, > >If the three authors of the source are all given within parens (as in your >example) with the closing paren on page 191 I'd give the entries for all >three the page range of 191-192. (After all, the date refers to all three >authors.) Unlike Carol, I would do this the same way as Lynn because all the information within the parentheses is relevant--the co-authors as well as the publication date. On the other hand, I might handle Lynn's accompanying example differently: >It's similar to that niggling thing we occasionally face where a >sentence continues onto the next page but the entirety of the reference to >the entry being made happens to be on the first page (with the rest of the >sentence on the succeeding page being about something else). I don't know >about everyone else, but I always establish a page range in those cases, >rightly or wrongly. If the _entirety_ of the reference to the entry being made really were on the first page only I would reference that page only. Chances are though that the rest of the sentence provides relevant context justifying the page range. Michael Brackney Brackney Indexing Service Grass Valley, CA ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 15:36:25 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Michael Brackney Subject: Book discussions vs. citations On Mon, 26 Aug 1996 Carol Roberts wrote: >I'd be interested in hearing how others out there make the distinction >between a citation and a discussion of a book. If you have a bunch of >quotes *from* a particular book (so you create an entry for the author and >maybe some subs for the content of the quotes) and then some discussion *of >the book itself* (say, the impact of the book on the field), what then? In >case that's totally unclear, here's a made-up example of what I mean: > >Blah, blah, and where Descartes talks, in the _Meditations_, about melting >wax, he's trying to show blah, blah, blah. . . . [on p. 10} When the >_Meditations_ first hit the stores, people misunderstood it and took to >believing in an evil genius. [on p. 20] > >I would treat it like this: > >Descartes, Rene > _Meditations on First Philosophy_, 20 > wax example, significance of, 10 >_Meditations on First Philosophy_ (Descartes), 20 I think the reference to page 10 needs to be included under the title as well as under the author. Depending on the depth of indexing required this could take the form of something as simple as Descartes, Rene: _Meditations on First Philosophy_, 10, 20 _Meditations on First Philosophy_ (Descartes), 10, 20 or something more extensive like Descartes, Rene _Meditations on First Philosophy_, 20 on [whatever he was trying to show], 10 _Meditations on First Philosophy_ (Descartes) melting wax passage, 10 popular misunderstanding of, 20 If the latter were a little too much, I might well put the citation reference rather than the discussion reference right after the title. Michael Brackney Brackney Indexing Service Grass Valley, CA ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 20:33:37 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: For Andre De Tienne Sorry to send a personal message to index-l. I tried to send a note directly to Andre, but it bounced back. My ISP seems to have difficulty with Bitnet addresses. Andre, do you have another e-mail address to which I could send you a note? Many thanks! Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) touch typist in a point-and-click world ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 11:36:45 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Angela Howard Subject: "vetts"? > > As a matter of course, whenever any book comes in, my husband vetts the pages > and marks page ranges for all headings throughout the book. > What does "vetts" mean? Couldn't find it in my dictionary as a verb. Maybe it's indexing/editing jargon? BTW, Lynn, those were great stories on indexing at maximum warp and getting your whole family involved. I'd mention the idea to my husband, but he'd probably run away screaming wildly ;-D _______________________________ Angela M. Howard Technical Writing and Indexing America Online, Inc. angela@sb.aol.com (805)882-2350 x126 _______________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 15:27:01 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Re: "vetting"? Vetting pages (according to my dictionary) means to "subject [something] to expert appraisal or correction." (British usage more than American, according to the dictionary). At 11:36 AM 8/27/96 -0700, Angela Howard wrote: >> >> As a matter of course, whenever any book comes in, my husband vetts the pages >> and marks page ranges for all headings throughout the book. >> >What does "vetts" mean? Couldn't find it in my dictionary as a verb. Maybe >it's indexing/editing jargon? > _______________________________ > > Angela M. Howard > Technical Writing and Indexing > America Online, Inc. > angela@sb.aol.com > (805)882-2350 x126 > _______________________________ > > ************ Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 13:07:02 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Michael Brackney Subject: Re: CMS 13 vs. CMS 14 On Sun, 25 Aug 1996 Willa MacAllen wrote: >I'm teaching an entry-level class on indexing at Cambridge Center in Cambridge, >Mass ... Someone in class asked the difference between the 13th & 14th editions. >Since I have only the 14th edition, I was not sure of the difference and >hope that someone who has been indexing awhile can tell me. About three years ago Nancy Mulvany published a comparison table on CMS 13 vs. CMS 14. She says "If people send me a self-addressed stamped envelope, I'll mail them a copy". Her address is Bayside Indexing Service, 265 Arlington Avenue, Kensington, CA 94707. In an article in the 1995 November-December issue of_Key Words_ I criticized the CMS 13 and CMS 14 comments on arranging leading homographs (names/terms spelled alike) and the CMS 13 comments on letter-by-letter vs. word-by-word arrangements. And if anybody mails me an SASE I'll mail them a copy of my article. Michael Brackney Brackney Indexing Service 134 Kathleen Way Grass Valley, CA 95945 916 272-7088 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 16:36:16 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: indexer@INET.NET Subject: Laptop question In going over some older Index-L posts, I saw one wherein someone mentioned how certain key combinations cannot be accomplished on some laptops. I recently bought a used (very cheap) laptop, a Toshiba 3100e/40, from a place called "New Source Computers" that I can highly recommend (they're on the Web if anyone's interested). Sure enough I discovered that the Cindex shift-[pg down] combination for copying a complete term won't work. I use this short cut constantly in my normal work so this is somewhat of a negative, although I would say that this is the perfect writer's laptop as it has a wonderful big bulky easy-to-use keyboard. Is there anything I can possibly do about this or is this just one of those "deal with it" things? Kevin Mulrooney ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dyslexics of the world untie! First State Indexing (302) 738-2558 276 East Main Street Indexer@inetcom.net Newark, Delaware 19711 http://www2.inet.net/~indexer/kjm.html ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 17:06:09 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: Re: "vetting"? In a message dated 96-08-27 15:34:00 EDT, you write: >Vetting pages (according to my dictionary) means to "subject [something] to >expert appraisal or correction." (British usage more than American, >according to the dictionary). > >At 11:36 AM 8/27/96 -0700, Angela Howard wrote: >>> >>> As a matter of course, whenever any book comes in, my husband vetts the >pages >>> and marks page ranges for all headings throughout the book. I should think the verb would be "vet," not "vett." I think it comes from having horses looked over by the veterinarian before being allowed to race. Helen Schinske HSchinske@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 18:20:16 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rachel Rice Subject: Re: Charging for proofreading? I'm interested in this discussion. Here's a little silly one. I asked one publisher if they wanted me to let them know about typos and was told, "no, you've got enough to do." I actually liked that as it showed he appreciated the amount of work we do. But then another production person from the same company said, sure, let me know if you see anything but don't go looking. And anyway, it'll get caught at proofing. So I wasn't looking but one can't help but see, so I gave a short list of errors spotted, she said thanks, great, and when I got my copy of the book, guess what, all the errors were still there. Hazel mentioned a check sheet she uses when talking to customers. Does anyone else use one? What other questions are on it besides the obvious ones. If anyone's interested, send me your checklist items, I'll compile them, and publish them to the list. Rachel Rachel Rice Directions Unlimited Desktop Services Chilmark, Mass. rachelr@tiac.net; http://www.tiac.net/users/rachelr/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 17:28:02 CDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lonergan Lynn Subject: Re: vetting Webster's Third International (unabridged) lists it as "vet, vetted, vetting." The British use the term quite frequently in spy talk. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Lynn A. Lonergan Assistant Editor/Librarian Air University Library Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6424 334-953-2504; fax 334-953-1192 llonergan@max1.au.af.mil ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 20:10:19 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: WMacallen@AOL.COM Subject: thanks & proofreading Hope I'm not confusing the issue by thanking everyone in one post. I thought Jan's example of Also see was really helpful, I've had 2 very helpful faxes on the Chicago question and am learning a lot on the issue of combining proofreading/indexing. Since I've started taking the USDA course on proofreading, I've realized that there is just as much to learn regarding proofreading as there is indexing. If I could write, I would write a book called THE ART OF PROOFREADING! I've mulled the idea around, but don't really have the skills to do it I think, however, the proofreading is an art--just like indexing!. I realize I'm still a beginner (I'd still like to work for a mentor if I could find one!) but proofreading is as important, I think, as creating the actual index! It does help to learn what other, more experienced indexers are doing it. Thanks again for all the responses! Willa MacAllen ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 20:41:42 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: "vetting"? In a message dated 96-08-27 18:15:59 EDT, Helen wrote (quoting me first): > >>> As a matter of course, whenever any book comes in, my husband vetts the > >pages > >>> and marks page ranges for all headings throughout the book. > > I should think the verb would be "vet," not "vett." I think it comes from > having horses looked over by the veterinarian before being allowed to race. > Oooops. Thanks, Helen! (I should have "vetted" my post more carefully for typos before sending it. "Vets" should have contained only one "t".) Your explanation for its origin sounds very plausible, BTW. Angela, Sorry for throwing "vets" up here on the list like that, then compounding the situation by misspelling it. ;-D I never looked it up, having picked up the term from other indexers, deciphering its meaning only from context. Had Cynthia not found its meaning in a dictionary, I'd really be walking away from here with egg on my face. ;-D (Thanks, Cindy!) Glad you liked my warp-9 indexing stories. (This just in... One of the Warp-speed-index clients called me today to tell me how much he liked the index and the short turnaround--for which they paid a premium.) Fortunately, my husband actually likes doing this type of work and happens to be extremely good at everything I've asked him to do so far, learns new software at blinding speed, etc. The next major part of this business expansion project is actually networking the computers together (instead of sending files across the room via AOL ;-D), which we've started by installing Win95 on the old computer yesterday with only one major screw-up(!), easily resolved in Win95's safe mode. Installing network hardware in both systems comes next. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 21:29:02 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: hazel blumberg-mckee Subject: Family indexing At 11:36 AM 8/27/96 -0700, you wrote: > >BTW, Lynn, those were great stories on indexing at maximum warp and getting >your whole family involved. I'd mention the idea to my husband, but he'd >probably run away screaming wildly ;-D I *have* mentioned the idea to my husband, and he *does* make this horrible screeching noise as he backs out the door. On occasion, he has to do some indexing at work, and it's not his favorite task. Ah, well, there's no accounting for tastes. After all, I was a kennel assistant, then a kennel technician at veterinary clinics and an animal shelter for some time. And I've got the muscles to prove it! I can now heft a fifty-pound load of just about anything (dog? bag of cat litter? you name it) with aplomb. Hey, even panache. It's getting late, and I'm getting punchy. Hazel > > > _______________________________ > > Angela M. Howard > Technical Writing and Indexing > America Online, Inc. > angela@sb.aol.com > (805)882-2350 x126 > _______________________________ > > Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "I was walloped by the mighty mackerel of memory."--Mark Hinson ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 23:32:54 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Charging for proofreading? In a message dated 96-08-27 18:36:54 EDT, you write: << I'm interested in this discussion. Here's a little silly one. I asked one publisher if they wanted me to let them know about typos and was told, "no, you've got enough to do." I actually liked that as it showed he appreciated the amount of work we do. But then another production person from the same company said, sure, let me know if you see anything but don't go looking. And anyway, it'll get caught at proofing. So I wasn't looking but one can't help but see, so I gave a short list of errors spotted, she said thanks, great, and when I got my copy of the book, guess what, all the errors were still there. >> I used to work as an in-house production editor for a college textbook publisher, and we never used the corrections that the indexer sent in at the end. By then it was far too late (unless it was an egregious error). That's why I don't bother sending in a list of typos. If I do come across anything serious, I contact the publisher immediately to let them know. Otherwise, I just keep moving and indexing. Leslie Leslie Leland Frank Editorial Services ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 23:33:01 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Family indexing Lynn, My husband has also helped me out in time of need. He knows both Cindex and In>sort and has input many indexes 'til the wee hours. He even occasionally offers if he knows I'm in a crunch. (That's when he's really trying to be sensitive.) He has also renumbered pages, but, unfortunately, he can't vet the pages or proofread. No eye for it. But, I use him where and when I can (my, that could sound kinky;D) Leslie Leslie Leland Frank Editorial Services ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 06:51:05 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Re: "vetting"? According to my dictionary (Webster's New Collegiate), the term "vet vt vetted vetting" exists, does refer to aspects of veterinary care, but also has a third meaning which is the one that deals with subjecting something to scrutiny. At 05:06 PM 8/27/96 -0400, Helen Schinske wrote: >In a message dated 96-08-27 15:34:00 EDT, you write: > >>Vetting pages (according to my dictionary) means to "subject [something] to >>expert appraisal or correction." (British usage more than American, >>according to the dictionary). >> >>At 11:36 AM 8/27/96 -0700, Angela Howard wrote: >>>> >>>> As a matter of course, whenever any book comes in, my husband vetts the >>pages >>>> and marks page ranges for all headings throughout the book. > >I should think the verb would be "vet," not "vett." I think it comes from >having horses looked over by the veterinarian before being allowed to race. > >Helen Schinske >HSchinske@aol.com > > ************ Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 11:11:51 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Mrowland@AOL.COM Subject: Re: "vetting"? For those of us who don't "vet," could someone explain what is involved in vetting page for indexing, and why it may be preferable for someone other than the indexer to do this. Thanks. Marilyn Rowland Indexing and Writing Cape Cod, MA ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 13:00:40 EDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Larry Baker/GRI/International Thomson Publishing Subject: Vetting Regarding the issue of vetting (and I've heard the term at two publishers I've worked at): Here at Gale Research, we might use vetters (or our authors might use vetters) to read through material to make sure it basically looks OK (or if we have reason to think something looks funny). As an example, for a product that involved lots of information about cities and states, vetters from key cities and each of the 50 states (they were usually from a state department or chamber of commerce) were hired to read through their particular state's entry. An author living in, say, Oregon, might use the most recent research material available on, say, Detroit. But a Detroit chamber of commerce employee would likely know of something that happened last week that wouldn't have been in any published sources. Or would know that the Detroit Pistons play at the Palace of Auburn Hills, not Heights. Or could expand on something, adding a bit more information to an entry (change "Mike Ilitch, owner of a local pizza chain" to "Mike Ilitch, owner of the Detroit-based Little Caesars pizza chain"). Those kinds of things. I remember a book I worked on a few years ago that compiled numerical information on any number of subjects -- from sports to home repair to banking. I put the call out to friends, coworkers, etc., so that somebody who was a bowler could verify the numbers presented in the scoring section; a handyman was able to confirm or correct information on insulation measurements, etc. But this is all for fact-checking the book itself. Can't say I've ever hired a vetter to check on an index though. With one exception, I've not had an author complain about the indexes we've had done by freelancers. (And let me put in my endorsement for having professional indexers, as opposed to authors, prepare indexes -- in general. I'm sure there are probably cases where it might make sense for an author to do a really technical index; but for general reference products, nah. Professional indexers do a better job.) Larry Baker Gale Research Detroit, Michigan larry_baker@gale.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 13:36:10 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: "vetting"? In a message dated 96-08-28 11:25:56 EDT, Marilyn wrote: > For those of us who don't "vet," could someone explain what is involved in > vetting page for indexing, and why it may be preferable for someone other > than the indexer to do this. > Hi Marilyn, When I used the term, I meant a) checking to ensure that all pages in the book (or batch of chapters) were included; b) ensuring that there aren't any particular problems that could interfere with indexing (e.g., pages printed so askew that part of the text is lost, unreadable page numbers, etc.) So, it may be that you do indeed vet your pages. Other indexers may define "vetting" differently, BTW, and I'd look forward to hearing their definitions. One reason that I try to have this done as soon as possible after receipt of pages is (aside from giving the publisher time to ship missing or corrected pages) that it gives editors a warm, fuzzy feeling when you call them the day you received the proofs (if problems are found), which suggests that you've given their project immediate attention. I have one client that consistently sends me problematic proofs, so experience with that publisher has dictated that I immediately have their pages vetted before any other books arriving that same day. ;-D I also strongly recommend this for new clients who could present ...ahem... unexpected situations. During "hell week", nearly all of the books were from brand-new clients (an oddity in itself) and one book started the page numbering over with page 1 at the beginning of each chapter. I immediately called them, asking if they wanted a chapter number-page number format for the locators, which they didn't! It was that the production editor (who was an absolute gem to work with, BTW) had sent me an unfolioed(sp?) set of proofs. This lead to a very lengthy session on the phone where another editor had to read me the page ranges for each chapter after calling the layout vendor and even that turned out to be incorrect when I later found a chapter beginning on a lefthand page. Either that or it didn't account for the nonindexable pages they inserted between each chapter, I don't remember exactly. I ended up having to call the layout vendor myself as the poor editor didn't know what was going on by that time. In the midst of this, we found that my proofs were also incorrect because a later change caused the subsequent pages to walk. Aiiish! We eventually got it straightened out. Despite all that, this happened to be one of the cleanest books I ever indexed with absolutely no typos!!!!!!!!! (I'd work for these folks again in a heartbeat despite all of those problems because they pay premiums for tight schedules and generally highly value their freelancers.) This would have been disasterous had I not had the pages immediately vetted because this was a very short turn-around project where they gave me only four days to do 400+ pages. (Of course, in that monster pile of books I had, I didn't start indexing it until two days before it was due, but at least the pagination problems had been resolved.) I also recommend a form of "vetting" for embedded indexing where clients send the document files. By that, I mean, copying the files to your hard disk ASAP. Too often I've received Mac-formatted disks, which are unreadable by a PC, to not make this standard procedure. It also gives you the opportunity to ensure that a file hasn't been corrupted, isn't missing, etc. Thus, this includes ensuring that you can open all of the files. (There are other little gremlins that can bite you on the behind when working with clients' files, such as the one that caught both the client and me unaware because of a "feature" new to FrameMaker 5 that made it impossible for the client to open the files I sent back to them. But that's another story/subject.) FrameMaker (all versions), in particular, has its own set of hoops that the client and indexer must jump through to ensure that everything works OK. As for any advantages of having this done by someone other than the indexer, the only one I can think of is saving time when you're working on other projects. If you don't have any other projects in progress, it may be more advantageous for the indexer to vet the pages as part of the process of familiarizing oneself with the book as a whole. (Even though my husband vets and marks page ranges for me, I do a quick scan through the entire book, but with familiarization in mind vs. the things I would look for in "vetting".) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 14:00:42 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: indexer@INET.NET Subject: Re: vetting Reading Lynn's fascinating story about her family's involvement in her indexing reminded me of our old thread of "marking up: to be or not to be". Specifically, while she doesn't mark up per se she admits how good it is to have her honey mark up the page ranges for chapter subheads. I couldn't agree more as to the usefulness of this and it is a decent argument on the plus side for marking up, or at least for those unfortunate few like myself who do it alone and don't have a sweetie to vet(t) for us. Kevin Mulrooney ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dyslexics of the world untie! First State Indexing (302) 738-2558 276 East Main Street Indexer@inetcom.net Newark, Delaware 19711 http://www2.inet.net/~indexer/kjm.html ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 15:14:16 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: vetting Kevin et al. To present a balanced viewpoint, let me say that not all indexers are as lucky as Lynn. Many of us have spouses who are "indexably challenged." My spouse is very glad it is I who do the indexing in the house, not him, and feels there's no room in the house for 2 indexers(!!). He doesn't have the knack for indexing (I've tried, in a pinch), and consequently doesn't do input for me or mark pages or anything like that. After a day of solving computer problems at his work (systems analyst cum trainer) and reading printouts, etc, he certainly doesn't want to deal with *my* indexing jobs! On occasion he has proofread or done data entry for author indexes, but only when I'm really pressed for time on a job. But by and large, I can't, don't, and will not use him as an assistant. So Lynn ... I hope you appreciate your good fortune. And for the rest of you who aren't as lucky, you have more company than you think! Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 15:14:25 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: "vetting"? To jump in and give you *my* definition of "vetting" ... to me it means marking pages prior to doing data input - as much or as little detail as one needs to be able to get the index into the computer quickly and relatively easily. So it's part marking page ranges, part highlighting key words/phrases, and part writing in the margin to remind me of how I want to do something. Is that an unusual use of the word? Just my use? Or a generally accepted description of the activity? Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 16:25:12 EDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Converted from OV/VM to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X From: NASEM020@SIVM.SI.EDU Subject: Re: "vetting" from a vettor In-Reply-To: note of 08/28/96 13:39 I have freelance vetted texts for local indexers, and have 1)checked pagination (to make sure every page was present); 2)written in folios when necessary; 3) indicated page ranges for chapters, heads, subheads, figures, tables, and even paragraphs; 4) checked text continuity (over page breaks) and 5) verified figures and tables match the text (and the figure legends match both the text and the figure). I even caught some typos and errors. It was great! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 18:14:33 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Christi Diamond Subject: Indexing Books for Sale Hello everyone, I just wanted to post a quick note that I have some indexing books for sale. I recently purchased them from ASI and they are still brand new and unused. Unfortunately, I have taken a new position so I will not be indexing and therefore do not need the books. If you are interested, please contact me at cdiamond@hevanet.com Thanks, Christi