From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 6-JAN-1997 10:04:29.23 To: CIRJA02 CC: Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9611C" Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:43:43 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9611C" To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 05:02:09 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Christine Shuttleworth <106234.1745@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Indexing biographies On Thursday 14 November Simon Cauchi wrote: The index you mention may well be unsatisfactory on other grounds, or else it may be the sort of biography which needs an entry for the main character. But I don't believe you can say, a priori, that all biographical indexes must have an entry for the subject. I didn't intend to imply this; as it happens, I have included such an entry in all the biographical entries I have done, but I agree that the text may not always require such an entry. Hazel Bell's booklet on "Indexing biographies" has a whole chapter on this question, entitled "Mighty main characters" in which she fully discusses the "dispersal" principle (that is dispersing throughout the index the topics which would be covered in subheadings to the entry for the main character, if there is no such entry). Carey, G. Norman Knight and M.D. Anderson have all advocated the "simple omission" of such entries because of the unwieldiness caused by multiple subheadings - sometimes making the entry virtually "a synopsis of the whole text" (Knight). Anderson commented, "Under X's name in the index are placed only such personal matters as his borth, marriage, and death, his characteristics, hobies, illnesses, and honours. Such restricted indexing of the main character, though, would produce a most misleading entry. The inclusion of a subject in an index carries an implied guarantee that all important references to it are listed. Dispersal under individual headings entails actual omissions in the main entry." Mary Piggott suggests, "If the entry under the main character is very long, pinpointing a specific topic, even when category headings have been used, can be difficult. It seems to me that double-entry is the only solution." And Hazel Bell adds, "Certainly, if space permits." I feel that - as in all indexing - each case must be considered on its own merits, and the convenience of the user should be the most important consideration. Christine Christine Shuttleworth Flat 1, 25 St Stephen's Avenue London W12 8JB Tel/Fax 0181 749 8797 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 07:04:36 CST Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lonergan Lynn Subject: Re: job opening This is _not_ an *official* job announcement but it may be of interest to someone out there. The position is Assistant Editor of the AIR UNIVERSITY LIBRARY INDEX TO MILITARY PERIODICALS. It requires an MLS. The opening is for a GS-9, civil service, at Maxwell Air Force Base in Montgomery, AL. It is full-time with all the benefits of working for the federal government. The duties include indexing of military and aerospace periodicals, reviewing of the indexing of others, and computer system administration. Familiarity with SCO UNIX and/or FrameMaker would be a _definite_ plus. Time is of the essence. If you are interested, send your resume ASAP to the Civilian Personnel Office 42 MSS/DPC, 50 LeMay Plaza South, Maxwell AFB AL 36112-6334, Attention Ms. Florida Thompson. Telephone number 334-953-2520 FAX 334-953-6040. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 09:58:02 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Truesdale Subject: Re: Speed Reading Course This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------5ED66BCF71ED Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As a beginning indexer, I was also wondering about taking a speed reading course. The USDF Correspondence school announced a new course on speed reading a few months ago, which put the idea in my mind. After all the years plowing through scientific & medical texts and journals, I am definitely *not* a fast reader! I haven't gotten around to gettin more info on the course, but they have a web site: http://grad.usda.gov/corres/corpro.hmtl -- Ann Truesdale "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." Eleanor Roosevelt --------------5ED66BCF71ED Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Received: from dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.8]) by ixmail2.ix.netcom.com (8.7.5/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id SAA29348; Wed, 13 Nov 1996 18:01:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost) by dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with internal id RAA03103; Wed, 13 Nov 1996 17:59:42 -0800 Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 17:59:42 -0800 From: Mail Delivery Subsystem Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown (Name server: bingvmb.bitnet: host not found) Message-Id: <199611140159.RAA03103@dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com> To: X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 The original message was received at Wed, 13 Nov 1996 17:59:40 -0800 from anntrue@chn-sc2-02.ix.netcom.com [205.186.171.66] ----- The following addresses had delivery problems ----- (unrecoverable error) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- 550 ... Host unknown (Name server: bingvmb.bitnet: host not found) ----- Original message follows ----- Return-Path: anntrue@ix.netcom.com Received: from chn-sc2-02.ix.netcom.com (anntrue@chn-sc2-02.ix.netcom.com [205.186.171.66]) by dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA03098 for ; Wed, 13 Nov 1996 17:59:40 -0800 Message-ID: <328AB1CA.23ED@ix.netcom.com> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 1996 21:44:42 -0800 From: Ann Truesdale X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01E-NC250 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Indexer's Discussion Group" Subject: Re: Speed Reading Course References: <199611121856.KAA03197@ixmail1.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As a beginning indexer, I too have been wondering about a speed reading course. An announcement a few months ago from the USDF correspondence school that they have begun offering a speed reading course was what brought the idea to my mind. After many years of crawling through science and medical texts and journals, I am *definitely* not a fast reader. I intended to enquire for further info on their course, but haven't gotten to it yet. -- Ann Truesdale "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." Eleanor Roosevelt --------------5ED66BCF71ED-- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 12:28:05 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: LostinWI@AOL.COM Subject: Locaters for glossary terms Another lurker here --- this list has been so helpful to me --- Would it be standard procedure to cite the page number where the term is being defined in the glossary section as a locator for that word when it has become a main entry?? I thought perhaps someone would refer to this as I was reading through the thread for unanalyzed locators.....but to no avail. I seems to me that if the glossary definition doesn't add information to what is being given in the text, I wouldn't need to reference it. What do you all do?? I think there is another question here. How would you define a "passing mention"? A sentence or two that doesn't add anything to the information you've already referenced to that entry? Or some relatively insignificant mention of a term that just happens to be in a paragraph or section that clearly needs to be indexed under a different term? Or..........?? Help, please! There are so many talented writers (to say nothing of indexers!!!) on this list. I must add that I particularily enjoy the humor. Anytime the printed word can make me laugh out loud, it is funny stuff!! Hazel, where do you find those wonderful quotes?? Jane (soaking up the wisdom that appears on Index-L) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 09:51:55 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sarah Lee Bihlmayer Subject: Mac Indexing Tool for FrameMaker Hello all...long time no delurk... A colleague of mine posted a query to another list earlier today; he's looking for a Mac-based indexing tool that works with FrameMaker. (Yes, I know, it has its own built-in indexing capabilities--for some reason he needs more functionality than it provides.) Answers, anyone? Sarah |Sarah Lee Bihlmayer * Intranet Documentation Specialist | |Site Development * Content Creation * Content Management| | Technical Writing * Developmental Editing * Indexing | | 415-207-4046 * sarahlee@contentmanage.com | ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 12:11:30 CST Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lonergan Lynn Subject: Re: job opening (salary estimation) I've been asked to give a salary range for the GS-9 civil service posting I sent earlier. It starts at $30,100/yr for someone who has no prior civil service at the next lower rank (usually a GS-7.) There is an approximate increase of $1000/yr the next three years and then raises about 2-3 years apart after that. I don't know off-hand what the top is. Benefits are 4 hrs of sick leave and annual leave earned every two weeks. After three years, annual leave is accrued at 6 hrs every two weeks. Ten holidays, no weekends, no evenings. Please don't quote me on any of this as this is not *official*. The job is mine (I'm going across the hall to be a cataloger for a while) and I suggested posting it here because there might be someone who can't or doesn't want to go the freelance route. I'll try to answer any other questions (unofficially :-D ) if you'd like to send them directly to me. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 14:04:43 -0500 Reply-To: norcross@ix.netcom.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Norcross Organization: Crossover Information Services Subject: Indexing biographies... and software manuals Hello, all. I was scanning sort of cursorily cursorily (that's both briefly AND with a cursor) through the following post because I do not index biographies; suddenly I noticed some points that reminded me of the questions I have when indexing software manuals, especially manuals about a single product (e.g., Microsoft ActiveX) rather than a broad topic (e.g., Internet graphics). > Hazel Bell's booklet on "Indexing biographies" has a whole chapter on this > question, entitled "Mighty main characters" in which she fully discusses > the "dispersal" principle (that is dispersing throughout the index the > topics which would be covered in subheadings to the entry for the main > character, if there is no such entry). Carey, G. Norman Knight and M.D. > Anderson have all advocated the "simple omission" of such entries because > of the unwieldiness caused by multiple subheadings - sometimes making the > entry virtually "a synopsis of the whole text" (Knight). This definitely happens with software manuals. I tend towards the dispersal method myself, because otherwise I do end up with an unwieldy book outline flowing from a single main heading for The Product. > Anderson commented, "Under X's name in the index are placed only such > personal matters as his borth, marriage, and death, his characteristics, > hobies, illnesses, and honours. Such restricted indexing of the main > character, though, would produce a most misleading entry. The inclusion of > a subject in an index carries an implied guarantee that all important > references to it are listed. Dispersal under individual headings entails > actual omissions in the main entry." Too true. I have occasionally used a product-name heading with a few subheads (installing, upgrading, migrating, getting help, uninstalling, etc.) but I agree that it produces a short and misleading main entry. However, it feels very odd to send out the index for The Product Book without a single main entry for The Product. I can just imagine the disgusted reader (or my editor, worse yet) scanning through the back of the book and remarking, "Holy cow! It's not even IN HERE!" How dreadful. > Mary Piggott suggests, "If the entry under the main character is very long, > pinpointing a specific topic, even when category headings have been used, > can be difficult. It seems to me that double-entry is the only solution." > And Hazel Bell adds, "Certainly, if space permits." The other option I've tried, and rejected, is a list of See entries under a main entry for The Product. It looks kind of dumb, and I'm not sure if it is useful or not. I thought it might be helpful to the reader who, reasonably enough, starts by looking up the product name. The problem here is: which other main entries get See references! I can easily end up with an outline of the index itself (aarrgggh, how recursive) under the main product entry. Thoughts? Hints? Howls of derisive laughter, Bruce? (obscure Monty Python reference to The Philosophers' Sketch :-) Ann Norcross Crossover Information Services Raleigh, NC ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 14:03:00 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kari Bero Subject: Re: Indexing biographies... and software manuals In-Reply-To: <199611152033.OAA21774@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu> My way of assisting users who _do_ look for an index entry for the main subject of a book, is to add a cross-reference like "See also specific topics in this index" or something similar. That way, I don't have a long list of cross-refs, but I get the point across that most entries are about the subject. The difficulty in doing this with software manuals is that there are some entries that are _better_ as sub-entries under the product. So, I struggle with what concepts to leave under the product main entry, and what concepts to leave as main entries only. I handle product names in software manuals this way, because I handle other books on other topics this way. (For a book on gardening, I would probably have very little under the heading "gardening" because most of the other index entries are assumed to be referring to gardening). I assume I'd try to do this with names in biographies, as well. I would have only very general subentries under the subject's main entry, and provide a cross-reference to general topics in the index. How do others handle this? - Kari -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Kari J. Bero Bero-West Indexing Services 206-937-3673 3722 Beach Drive SW, Suite 101 bero@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu Seattle, WA 98116 http://alexia.lis.uiuc.edu/~bero/ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 17:54:37 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Cynthia D. Bertelsen" Subject: Books for Indexers to Read for Fun (and Education) Seeing as that we have been discussing author-generated indexes, it seems to also be important to think about the reader for a moment, too. As a treat to myself :-), I just bought A History of Reading, by Alberto Manguel (Viking, 1996, ISBN0-670-84302-4, $26.95). It is a wonderful discussion of readers throughout history. The index has no entries for "indexes," but the index to the book is an interesting example of how subheads are arranged by page order rather than alphabetically. There is another book that has been helpful, too, when it comes to the act of reading (we have been discussing speed reading, afterall). Although How to Read a Book: The Classic Guide to Intelligent Reading, by Mortimer Adler and Charles van Doren, was first published in 1940 (and was a bestseller then!), it has been reprinted and has some interesting chapters on how to really read certain types of material in order to get the most out of them. The third part of the book, for example, discusses how to read books on history, how to read science and mathemetics, etc. This book assists in aiding increased comprehension, rather than increased speed. Does anyone have other, similar books to suggest? ************ Cynthia D. Bertelsen INDEXER Blacksburg, VA cbertel@nrv.net http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 20:47:07 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Word-processed indexes revisited Hi folks, We've had a few threads going recently about the pros and cons of delivering word-processed versions of indexes to clients. In fact, about two months ago, I posted a humongous message here (about macros for formatting indexes) in which I mentioned applying paragraph styles to heading levels. I had been doing this because it was extremely convenient for me (using the macro that applied them to the RTF file) and suspected that it would be welcomed by clients wanting Word files as well. Well, I just had industrial-strength confirmation today that at least one of my clients finds this to be extremely helpful. I had uploaded an index to him an hour ago as a WinWord 6.0 file and he called me frantically because none of the paragraph formatting styles had come through! All of the heading levels had come through as the "Normal" default style. He explained the styles make it tremendously easy for them to import the index into their desktop publishing software and format the index using the styles I applied. (Possibly they tweak them a bit more, but such tweaks are easily made on a global basis.) Without the styles, he said, they would find it much more labor-intensive to desktop publish the index. I re-emailed the file as a version 2.0 file, then sent yet another version UUENCODED just to make sure. When I called him back to confirm that the styles came through OK, he was just as tickled pink as could be because the styles had indeed come through. (It sounded as if they were already almost finished with formatting the index in that short period of time--about 15 minutes after I sent the second version.) Anyway, the moral of this little tale is that certain clients, as this one did, may find it extremely helpful to receive indexes where the heading levels are formatted by applying paragraph styles (vs. tabs, etc.). YMMV. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 20:47:11 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Mac Indexing Tool for FrameMaker In a message dated 96-11-15 13:06:04 EST, Sarah write: > Hello all...long time no delurk... Indeed, Sarah! I missed you here!! :-) > > A colleague of mine posted a query to another list earlier today; he's > looking for a Mac-based indexing tool that works with FrameMaker. (Yes, I > know, it has its own built-in indexing capabilities--for some reason he > needs more functionality than it provides.) Answers, anyone? There is a Mac-based (and now, finally, Windows-based) tool for FrameMaker called IXGEN (tm), produced by a company called FSA (Frank Stearns Associates). It's billed as an Indexing and Marker Management Tool. I've been planning to get it myself but haven't yet, so I can't give you and your colleague any info on how well it works. Anyway, your colleague can contact FSA via email at franks@fsatools.com or at the following phone numbers: Toll free in USA: 800-567-6421 Outside the USA: 206-892-3970 If your colleague emails FSA for info, he or she'll get quite a bit of info by return email. BTW, the info I have is for FrameMaker version 4.0. I don't know if it works with version 5.0 (the current FM version) or if it's been upgraded for version 5.0. (Plus, all of this info about FSA is almost two years old according to the date of the email reply I have from them. ;-D) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 20:47:15 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Locaters for glossary terms In a message dated 96-11-15 12:52:34 EST, Jane wrote: > Would it be standard procedure to cite the page number where the term is > being defined in the glossary section as a locator for that word when it has > become a main entry?? Jane, I just delivered an index where I indexed some but not all of the glossary terms. The criterion I used was whether I already had a main heading for the term. This may sound weird way of handling it, but the glossary was to a word-processing software book and contained oodles of terms that had nothing to do with the subject of the book. (This seems to be a trend in computer book glossaries these days.) In some cases, the definition in the glossary was more substantive than the definition given elsewhere in the text. In many instances, I did not already have a "defined" subentry for these main headings because the actual definition was buried in a page range encompassing a broader discussion, so I felt that providing a locator for the glossary definition was a service to the reader. Another reason that I use the pre-existence of a main heading as a criterion is that, in some cases, glossary entries are made for terms actually included in the text but were mentioned so trivially as to not bear indexing (at least from my viewpoint). Well, as far as I'm concerned, it's still trivial, even if defined in the glossary. (If I indexed those particular entries, I'd feel as if I distorted the index structure by doing so and would then feel compelled to go back and find those trivial references in the text for the sake of symmetry--not a good idea, IMHO.) ;-D > >I thought perhaps someone would refer to this as I was reading through the >thread for unanalyzed locators.....but to no avail. I seems to me that if >the glossary definition doesn't add information to what is being given in the >text, I wouldn't need to reference it. What do you all do?? We may have discussed it some in the thread that ran simultaneously with the unanalyzed locators that I misnamed "vocabulary words" or something like that when I started it. (It was mainly about non-noun glossary terms.) I feel that if you don't already have a subentry pointing to where the term is defined that pointing to the glossary definition is useful. If you do have a subentry pointing specifically to where the term is defined, not much is lost by merely tacking another locator onto it pointing to the glossary definition. The two "definitions" aren't always identical or written from exactly the same point of view. (The indexer can encounter a passage in the text and refer to it as "defined" though this may not be what the author conceived of as being the actual definition.) Plus, the alternative would mean going back and forth between the text and the glossary definitions to determine which one was more "worthy" of receiving the locator for a "defined" subentry. So, I just tack the locator on and keep on steppin'. ;-D Now, my handling of this issue may not be at all what is "standard"... some indexers may not index the glossary at all and may be able to present some excellent reasons for not doing so. > > I think there is another question here. How would you define a "passing > mention"? A sentence or two that doesn't add anything to the information > you've already referenced to that entry? Or some relatively insignificant > mention of a term that just happens to be in a paragraph or section that > clearly needs to be indexed under a different term? Or..........?? Help, > please! This gets icky and is a question that arises pretty often, IMHO. One person's "passing mention" may be another person's "gem". I take a pretty hard look at these situations that seem to arise in nearly every book, handling them on a case-by-case basis. Sometimes what appears to be a passing mention isn't because of the context in which it's mentioned casts a useful perspective on it (however unintentionally). At other times, it's just a passing mention that, if indexed, it would send the index user down a totally useless blind alley. Still other times, it's downright silly reference, having absolutely no relevance to what's being discussed at that point--or sometimes to any point in the whole known cosmos. (I hit upon one of these around 2am this morning and I was definitely not in the mood, especially coming right after finding an unexplained 60-page gap in pages that my husband missed when "vetting" the book!!! ??? !!!! Yes, I woke him up, going postal about that goof on a book to which the index was due this morning, and he never did go back to bed. ;-D Fortunately, the client intentionally didn't send me those pages, but forgot to tell me about it.) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 20:47:20 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Indexing biographies... and software manuals In a message dated 96-11-15 15:35:30 EST, Anne wrote (quoting Christine): > > Anderson commented, "Under X's name in the index are placed only such > > personal matters as his borth, marriage, and death, his characteristics, > > hobies, illnesses, and honours. Such restricted indexing of the main > > character, though, would produce a most misleading entry. The inclusion of > > a subject in an index carries an implied guarantee that all important > > references to it are listed. Dispersal under individual headings entails > > actual omissions in the main entry." ...adding... > > Too true. I have occasionally used a product-name heading with a few > subheads (installing, upgrading, migrating, getting help, uninstalling, > etc.) but I agree that it produces a short and misleading main entry. > However, it feels very odd to send out the index for The Product Book > without a single main entry for The Product. I can just imagine the > disgusted reader (or my editor, worse yet) scanning through the back of > the book and remarking, "Holy cow! It's not even IN HERE!" How > dreadful. Hmmm, I never thought this would necessarily be a misleading main entry. With the exception of "getting help" in your examples of subentries for the Product, these are the types of things that I list under the heading for the Product. (BTW, I think of "help" along the lines of it being a product feature, subapplication, etc. and therefore don't list it under The Product. After all, software manuals are full of features, subapplications, etc.) Here's the entire listing of what I indexed for The Product in an index I sent off today: Product exiting, 590, 603 file transfer for earlier versions, 179-180 on networks, 588 starting, 3, 589 In terms of the "dispersal" approach, while all of these appear elsewhere in the index, I don't think that inclusion of the main entry for The Product implies that these are the all of the references to The Product. ;-D It is a question, IMHO, of whether readers are likely to look for these subjects under a main heading for The Product. When these subentries are spun out as main headings (except for the file transfer one which is buried somewhere under Files and may be questionable here), the only concept they can point back to is The Product itself in this particular index, thus some readers are likely to first look for them under the main entry for The Product itself. Meanwhile, these same readers, along with everyone else, know that the entire book is about the The Product and certainly wouldn't expect to find everything in the book indexed under The Product and aren't even thinking about The Product per se when they attempt to access other concepts in the book. (Aiiish! Thinking about this is starting to give me a headache!) > > > Mary Piggott suggests, "If the entry under the main character is very long, > > > pinpointing a specific topic, even when category headings have been used, > > can be difficult. It seems to me that double-entry is the only solution." > > And Hazel Bell adds, "Certainly, if space permits." > > The other option I've tried, and rejected, is a list of See entries > under a main entry for The Product. It looks kind of dumb, and I'm not > sure if it is useful or not. I thought it might be helpful to the > reader who, reasonably enough, starts by looking up the product name. > The problem here is: which other main entries get See references! I can > easily end up with an outline of the index itself (aarrgggh, how > recursive) under the main product entry. Eeek! This does get awfully recursive when you really think about it and your mind starts getting that same singed quality that occurs when considering things like time paradoxes. Anyway, I agree that a list of See refs under the main entry for The Product doesn't work (having tried and rejected that option myself). I think that if the See refs are so closely related to the concept of The Product itself that a reader is likely to look at The Product main entry, you may as well just put the appropriate subentry there as the reader is already there. > > Thoughts? Hints? Howls of derisive laughter, Bruce? (obscure Monty > Python reference to The Philosophers' Sketch :-) No derisive laughter from this corner, just my $.02. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 20:47:24 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: hyphens and en dashes In a message dated 96-11-14 17:45:16 EST, you write: > > Lynn: > > The passage you couldn't find in _Chicago_ is 5.117. Unfortunately it's not > indexed under "compound words" as one might think but under "compound > adjectives" a few lines up. This raises once again the question of whether > we should index such narrow topics at the main heading level, the subheading > level, or both. I was taught to do both as a matter of course and I that's > what I usually do unless space limitations prevent it. (This particular > case is more complicated in that the correct inclusive term used in the > text, "compounds", is not included in the index.) Michael, A thousand thanks for that info! You obviously sensed that I had gone everywhere in the index trying to find that reference. ;-D First, I looked under "punctuation" which contained many subentries but not the one I needed, then for "en dashes", which didn't exist as a main entry, then finally under "dash, en" which contained the subentry "compound words". Unfortunately, it referred me to 5.94, p. 180 and I went to p.180 (confused by the locator format there, thinking that p.180 was where 5.94 appeared) which gave an extremely abbreviated version of what appears at 5.94, the equivalent of your 5.117. (I have the full 13th edition, but only chapter 17 of the 14th edition, which must be what you have.) Aside from the fact that I misunderstood what was meant by the locators themselves, the fact that I conducted my search from a totally different point of view (the punctuation itself) definitely supports your statement about the need for double posting. Oddly enough, "compound" anything as a main heading didn't even come to mind in my search (though it would very logically come to mind for someone else or maybe even to me had I not been so sleepy at the time). At any rate, I agree that, when space permits, rather narrow topics should be indexed at the main heading level. I was initially thrown a bit off-stride by not finding a main entry for "en dash", BTW, finding it interesting that dashes were indexed as Dash, em ...subentries... Dash, en ...subentries... Dash, 3-em ...subentries... Dash, 2-em ...subentries... ...in that exact order. Hmmmmm. If anyone can explain why these were sorted in this particular way, I'd appreciate hearing it. BTW, the index to the 13th edition did contain a heading for "compounds" as you said it should. However, it was nothing but a block of See refs which included "Adjectives, compound" as a target among others. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 21:48:40 +1100 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jon and Glenda Subject: Subject: marketing - Who pays for the index? Anne M. Heiles wrote: Subject: marketing > Our company, a publisher, contracts an author to write a book and includes as part of the contract a statement that the author is responsible for the index. When the edited manuscript reaches the pages stage, our editors try to persuade the author to pay for a professional indexer. If the author agrees, the editor hires the indexer and the company pays as an advance on royalties. >It would help us persuade authors to have a statement from a group of indexers who can explain the advantages of a professional index. I know I won't be the only person to say this, but... why not pay for the index yourselves? You seem to agree that a good index adds to the market value of the book, and as publishers you actually stand to make more profit from each copy sold than the author does - surely it would be in your interests as publisher to pay the indexer direct. After all, you pay the editor, the proofreader, the printer, and the cover artist. What makes the indexer so different? Jonathan. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 01:12:05 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: Frank Stearns info/alph. of Chicago index Lynn's info on Frank Stearns Associates matches what I have on my handout from the recent PNW meeting, except that Vancouver, WA, now has the 360 area code, not the 206. So the contact info would now be: Frank Stearns Associates 17201 SE 38th Circle Vancouver, WA 98683 Toll free in USA: 800-567-6421 Outside the USA: 360-892-3970 email: franks@fsatools.com http://www.pacifier.com/~franks The alphabetization Lynn mentioned in the Chicago index (dash, em; dash, en; dash, 3-em; dash, 2-em) looks like it's alphabetized as though spelled out (tHree comes before tWo). Helen Schinske HSchinske@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 02:09:16 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DStaub11@AOL.COM Subject: Re: marketing I told a new acquaintance that I'm an indexer, and he looked utterly baffled, so I started explaining further about what indexing is (as I've done a million times). He said, "No, I know what it is, but I work for a company that publishes reference books, and I just don't understand why anyone would hire someone to do that." !! Turns out it's a tech company and he's talking about software manuals. First he said a computer should just be able to do it; when I refuted that with an example he said, "Why don't they just have the author do it? I'm sure a professional indexer would do a better job, but I just can't believe anyone would want to pay for that." I said, "Of course, I assume that we all have the reader's best interest in mind, right?" (slightly sarcastic!) Sure pushes my buttons--when I get into a conversation like that I feel as if they're insulting me (your skills are useless; why would anyone want to pay you to do what you do...). I realize that in order to talk to publishers and authors about this issue I have to back up and not feel personally insulted. Sigh. Do Mi ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 02:09:20 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DStaub11@AOL.COM Subject: Re: speed reading I read very, very fast--I think you could probably call me a natural speed reader. I'm reading for comprehension, but taking it in very fast. And this has been a ^great^ help to me in indexing--it means that I can read the book twice or more if I need to (though I rarely end up doing this); it also means that I can do more jobs in the same amount of time, which raises my income. If those speed-reading courses work and might help someone to raise their rate of comprehension (not scanning), I would highly recommend them. Do Mi ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 21:21:41 +1300 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Simon Cauchi Subject: passing mentions Jane asks: >How would you define a "passing >mention"? A sentence or two that doesn't add anything to the information >you've already referenced to that entry? Or some relatively insignificant >mention of a term that just happens to be in a paragraph or section that >clearly needs to be indexed under a different term? Or..........?? Help, >please! A passing mention is necessarily brief, but apart from that the only definitions I know are circular. If it's a passing mention, it's not worth indexing. If it's not worth indexing, it's a passing mention. Bear in mind that very brief mentions can be very important, quite important enough to deserve a locator and possibly even a subheading in the index. Some examples may perhaps be easier to think about than a definition. Let us say you are indexing the chapter on poetry, 1945-1960, in a literary history. Let us say there is a five-page section devoted to Horace Wordsmith, author of Poems (1947) and More Poems (1952), who died an untimely death in 1955. After the passage devoted to Wordsmith, which of course would be indexed, there are brief mentions of him later on, like this: 1 "The poets of the 1960s had by now rejected the austere classicism of Wordsmith, Speakeasy, X, Y, Z ..." 2 "Unlike Horace Wordsmith, Horatio Speakeasy really did know Latin ..." 3 "Echoing the pastoral tones of Wordsmith's More Poems (1952), and even imitating its typography, a startling new volume appeared in 1969, namely ..." I suggest that the mentions of Wordsmith and his book in item 3 should be indexed in all but the simplest indexes, those in items 2 and 3 in a somewhat more elaborate index, and all three items only in a very full, exhaustive index. IHTH From Simon Cauchi, Freelance Editor and Indexer 13 Riverview Terrace, Hamilton, New Zealand Telephone and facsimile +64 7 854 9229, e-mail cauchi@wave.co.nz ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 05:33:32 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Christine Shuttleworth <106234.1745@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Indexing biographies This is a quick grovel ... I was tempted to keep quiet after my recent gaffe of attributing something Sonsie said to Victoria, but as my second misattribution has now been quoted by others, I feel bound to put the record straight: Hazel Bell has pointed out that in my quotation from M.D. Anderson, only the first sentence is Anderson's. The rest (from "Such restricted indexing... " onwards) is comment by Hazel herself. Also, I mistyped "birth" and "hobbies" as "borth" and "hobies". Sorry! Christine Shuttleworth ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 06:12:24 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Christine Shuttleworth <106234.1745@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Feeling insulted Do Mi writes: I feel as if they're insulting me (your skills are useless; why would anyone want to pay you to do what you do...). I realize that in order to talk to publishers and authors about this issue I have to back up and not feel personally insulted. Sigh. I've often got hot under the collar about tactless remarks: here are some examples: 1. (At a party:) "But don't you feel you're wasting your qualifications, doing that sort of work?" 2. (When I was wearing a T-shirt with a Society of Indexers logo:) "I love that... it's so delightfully obscure!" 3. (At a seminar:) "We find our clients don't use indexes much: they usually seem to remember where they saw things... " 4. (A publisher (!) who telephoned me this week:) "Er... forgive my ignorance, but is indexing actually regarded as a profession?" Yes, I think we should keep our cool when faced with this sort of thing, and treat it as an opportunity to raise awareness of the importance of what we do - but it's not always easy! Christine Shuttleworth ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 09:28:35 -0500 Reply-To: INDEX-L LIST Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Norcross Organization: Crossover Information Services Subject: Re: Feeling insulted I can't tell you how often I've had this conversation: Them: "What is you do again? That Table of Contents thing, right?" Me: "Indexes. You know, when you look stuff up in the BACK of the book, alphabetically? That's an index; I write those. They send me a manuscript, I decide what should be in the index, I type the words and the page numbers into a file on the computer, then I send the file to the publisher, and they send me money. It's great!" Them: "You read the whole book?!?" Me: "Yes, and it's really cool. I get to read about all kinds of different things; it's interesting." Them: "I heard that computers do that now. Why don't you just get the right program?" alternative Them: "Sounds great. Why don't you show me how to do it; I need an easy way to make a little extra money. How 'bout this weekend?" Me: "Is that my phone? Gotta go." True Confession: The first time I heard that someone was a professional indexer I (coming from 10 years of technical writing) said, "People do that FULL TIME? As a PROFESSION?? WHY would anyone want to do that?" And yes, I said this to the indexer himself, who graciously ignored me and a short year later became my indexing mentor and another year after that became a Large part of my emotional support as I started doing this full-time myself. Ann Norcross Crossover Information Services Raleigh, NC ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 09:58:55 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: MaryMort@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Locaters for glossary terms In a message dated 96-11-15 12:52:34 EST, Jane wrote: > Would it be standard procedure to cite the page number where the term is > being defined in the glossary section as a locator for that word when it has > become a main entry?? Jane, In my experience, some clients have a clear preference - either the glossary should definitely be indexed or it should not. And this can make a difference when you're charging by the page (i.e., including the glossary pages in the total page count or not.) With a new client, or the first book with a glossary from an existing client, I first take a look at the glossary and try to get an idea of whether there is much duplication with the text. This may mean that I'll start reading the book before checking with the client. In this way, I form an opinion on whether the glossary entries should be indexed before I call the client to find out what they prefer (or if they have a preference.) In the situation where there are terms in the glossary that are not mentioned in the book (this happened in a gardening book I indexed), I have included them in the index. I did tell the client that in case the index needed to be radically shortened, these were entries that I would recommend deleting. Mary -- * Mary Mortensen * marymort@aol.com * Lawrence, Kansas, USA ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 10:10:19 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hazel Blumberg-McKee Subject: Re: Who pays for the index? In-Reply-To: <199611160545.AAA10580@polaris.net> On Fri, 15 Nov 1996, Jon and Glenda wrote: > I know I won't be the only person to say this, but... why not pay for the index > yourselves? Great point! I only wish things worked this way. In my experience, either (1) the author pays for the index, either up front or out of royalties; (2) the author and the press split the cost of having the index prepared; or (3) the press pays for the index. Number 1 seems to be the most common, #2 is rarer, and #3 is rarer still. Because #1 is the most common, any number of authors decide to "save the money" and write the index themselves. Or they decide to "shop around for the lowest price," which is what several authors have told me of late. I also proofread, and I'm finding that many presses aren't hiring freelance proofers any longer. Rather, they're requiring the *author* to proof his or her own book. This practice is absurd. Not only is the author coping with his or her edited manuscript, but he or she is also trying to compare it to the final version of the book. No wonder we're finding so many typos in books these days. These strike me as bad ways to save money. But then again, I'm not a publisher, so I don't know where else one could cut expenses. Indexes and proofreading aren't things that should be cut from the budget, IMHO. Hazel Hazel Blumberg-McKee (hazelcb@polaris.net) "Cats are smarter than dogs. You can't get eight cats to pull a sled through snow."--Jeff Valdez ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 13:06:13 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Feeling insulted I just have to add my own experience to this discussion. It was more in the editorial line than indexing, although I was discussing with my brother and his then girlfriend what I did/do for a living. She said, "Gee, next time I have a big paper due, I'll bring it to you for help." I responded jokingly by stating my hourly rate. My brother, yes, my own brother said, "That's an awful lot of money for just typing things in." My silent screams of frustration put an end to the conversation. Of course, he did get me in touch with a lucrative client a year or two later, so I have to forgive him. Leslie Leland Frank Editorial Services ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 10:18:05 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Feeling insulted At 09:28 AM 11/16/96 -0500, Ann Norcross wrote: >alternative Them: "Sounds great. Why don't you show me how to do it; I >need an easy way to make a little extra money. How 'bout this weekend?" > >Me: "Is that my phone? Gotta go." Ann, I've had several friends ask me the identical question and be somewhat insulted that I didn't just drop everything and provide them with a few easy lessons on how to index! This has been especially true of folks who come from a publishing background...they think that because they have some editorial skills, indexing should be a snap. And I don't think it helped when Money Magazine published that stupid article a year or so ago about making $50,000 a year doing something so "simple" and "easy to learn." Ugh. I will admit that indexing came pretty easily to me...but I think that is because it requires a certain kind of mind and an assortment of peculiar organizing skills that some people just "have." It's certainly possible to be a good indexer by learning the skills, but it's a lot easier if you naturally think that way to begin with. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 10:19:29 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Feeling insulted >At 09:28 AM 11/16/96 -0500, Ann Norcross wrote: > >>alternative Them: "Sounds great. Why don't you show me how to do it; I >>need an easy way to make a little extra money. How 'bout this weekend?" >> >>Me: "Is that my phone? Gotta go." > >Ann, I've had several friends ask me the identical question and be somewhat insulted that I didn't just drop everything and provide them with a few easy lessons on how to index! This has been especially true of folks who come from a publishing background...they think that because they have some editorial skills, indexing should be a snap. > >And I don't think it helped when Money Magazine published that stupid article a year or so ago about making $50,000 a year doing something so "simple" and "easy to learn." Ugh. > >I will admit that indexing came pretty easily to me...but I think that is because it requires a certain kind of mind and an assortment of peculiar organizing skills that some people just "have." It's certainly possible to be a good indexer by learning the skills, but it's a lot easier if you naturally think that way to begin with. > =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 14:21:35 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Indexing biographies... and software manuals In a message dated 96-11-15 15:35:33 EST, Ann writes: > I have occasionally used a product-name heading with a few > subheads (installing, upgrading, migrating, getting help, uninstalling, > etc.) but I agree that it produces a short and misleading main entry. This is what I usually do with software, too. Some other things I put in there are versions (saving as older version , or converting files from previous versions) and technical support. All of which are doubled posted elsewhere. It seems to work, but I'm making assumptions. In usability tests that I've watched testing online indexes, no one ever looked under the product's name, so I guess it is okay. Jan Wright ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 14:21:51 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Feeling insulted How about a subtle statement that the number one complaint that computer users have about manuals is the lack of good indexes! Pc Magazine did a survey in '92, and those were the results. (I have the citation if anyone needs it, but not at my fingertips). And I don't think anything has changed, other that information moving online to even worse keyword indexing. Their users do indeed care. Second subtle statement - how about if having a good index in your manual keeps one phone call a day off your technical support system, and if each call is worth $15.00 to your company, surely that index is worth something too. (Can you tell I am growing rather fond of this "An index a day keeps the phone calls away" idea?) Harumph! Double Harumph! Jan Wright ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 13:48:49 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Mac Indexing Tool for FrameMaker In a message dated 96-11-15 13:06:03 EST, you write: > A colleague of mine posted a query to another list earlier today; he's > looking for a Mac-based indexing tool that works with FrameMaker. (Yes, I > know, it has its own built-in indexing capabilities--for some reason he > needs more functionality than it provides.) Answers, anyone? > > There is a Windows-based indexing tool for helping out FrameMaker indexers, called IxGen (also for Unix). Info about it is on the ASI web page. Perhaps he could check and see if it is possible to convert the document's files over to the PC, get the indexing done, then take them back to the Mac? That works with PageMaker files (graphics can get weird, but taking them back should fix it). Just an idea, as I do not know if Frame files can go through this kind of conversion. Jan Wright ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 18:07:43 +0000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Elizabeth M. Moys" Subject: Who pays for the index I entirely agree with Jon and Glenda that it should be the publisher who pays for the index. To the best of my knowledge, this is what happens in the UK in relation to legal publications. I am quite sure that the judges, lecturers and senior lawyers who write the books I index would not be seen dead paying for an index! And the publishers would never even consider asking them, either. I imagine that much the same probably happens with medical books. Can anyone produce an answer there? I can see no logical reason why the publishers of books in other subject areas should not pay for the indexes themselves. They could still keep financial control, within reason, by setting limits (as, by all accounts, many of them do anyway). If they feel that doing this would seriously affect their profitability, I suppose they *might* try offering the authors a minutely smaller percentage of royalties, but I doubt if this would frequently be justified. I do realise that law publishers tend to have a captive market for some of their titles, especially among law libraries, which accounts for some of the complaints from librarians about allegedly excessive prices. Even so, the cost of an index, large of small, is a very small portion of the total cost of producing and selling the book. Law publishers, at least, seem to be sufficiently convinced of the importance of good indexes to act accordingly. Other publishers please follow!! Well, that's my two penniworth (we have pennies here, not cents, and, going back a few weeks, I have not been certified yet!) Betty ==================================================================== Elizabeth M. Moys email: betty@moys.demon.co.uk Phone & Fax: +44 (0)1959-534530 Hengist, Badgers Road, Badgers Mount, Sevenoaks, Kent, TN14 7AT, England ==================================================================== ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 18:02:20 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: MaryMort@AOL.COM Subject: Index mentioned Hi, all, In the November 11 issue of _Publisher's Weekly_, there's a review of _Diaries: Volume One, 1939-1960_ by Christopher Isherwood, edited by Katherine Bucknell (HarperCollins/di Capua.) The book is 1056 pages, BTW, and will appear in January. The anonymous review includes the following: "To many readers, the most important part of this literally weighty book will be the index. Although not in the canonized elite of the Auden-Priestley generation, Isherwood, through his connections on both sides of the Atlantic and his Hollywood scriptwriting years, encountered a vast number of people whose doings and misdoings make his diaries a mine of rumor, anecdotage and mere facts." Cheers, Mary -- * Mary Mortensen * marymort@aol.com * Lawrence, Kansas, USA ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1996 18:33:48 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DStaub11@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Main subjects vs. dispersal...and abbreviations Kari wrote: >My way of assisting users who _do_ look for an index entry for the main >subject of a book, is to add a cross-reference like "See also specific >topics in this index" or something similar. That way, I don't have a long >list of cross-refs, but I get the point across that most entries are about >the subject. The difficulty in doing this with software manuals is that >there are some entries that are _better_ as sub-entries under the product. >So, I struggle with what concepts to leave under the product main entry, >and what concepts to leave as main entries only. > This is exactly what I do: it reads as "See also specific topics." Sometimes it feels arbitrary to me which ones I leave under the main heading and which I "break out" or disperse; I base my decisions on how it sounds, feels--very intuitive. Another time when this issue comes up is a book in which a lot, but not all, of the book is about one topic. I just finished an anthropology monograph which examined a particular phenomenon (the Village Scout movement in Thailand); 1/4-1/3 of the book was historical and political context (in other words, headings that didn't apply directly to the subject) and the rest was about the subject. I ended up putting a lot of subheadings under main entries beginning with "Village Scout," such as Village Scout movement creation, decline, politicization, etc. It felt somewhat unwieldy, but the alternative was to have headings for "politicization," which in the context of the text wouldn't necessarily refer just to the movement....One of those situations where it's unwieldy either way, I think. And of course I used see also references like mad. And I would very much like input on another decision I made in this book: because I had so many headings beginning with "Village Scout," I decided to abbreviate it to VS. This will be explained in the headnote to the index, along with some page reference specs. I got the idea from biography indexes in which the subject's initials are used. What do people think? Have you done this, for a biography subject or another topic? Do you think readers will be able to handle it? (The editor will be able to search-and-replace it if he doesn't like it.) Do Mi Stauber ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 00:07:13 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Seth A. Maislin" Subject: Re: Feeling insulted Having experienced the story that I've read from you guys at least twice so far -- "People actually write indexes full-time?" -- had prompted me to begin my talk at the MA Chapter ASI meeting with the simlar anecdote. "So what do you do?" they ask. "You read the books ... and then what?" I remember being in the same boat about the "full-time" question when I first found out about indexing. A clipping from a Mass. paper about Susan Holbert's class was mailed to me by a friend. I couldn't be sure if this was a "Read books -- Make $$$" scam or if it was for real. Fortunately, it was for real ... "INDEX books. Make $$$" ;-) Yet once you manage to get over that hurtle, again and again -- "And people just call you up and say, 'I have a book that needs an index'?" -- the next question is invariably, "How do you know what to index?" And *this*, my fellow indexers, is a question that is close to impossible to answer. You should try it sometime. Witness the recent "What's a passing reference?" thread. I think once you can explain the How part, out loud, to yourself, there will be little reason to feel insulted any more. The How part is what makes indexing an enjoyable challenge and a worthwhile profession. - 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) 661-1116 facsimile smaislin@world.std.com WWW: http://www.ora.com/people/staff/seth ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 07:42:36 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Fwd: Mac Indexing Tool for FrameMaker Hi folks, Frank Stearns tried to post this to the list, but it bounced, so he sent it to me privately. It corrects misinformation in my own post on the subject and adds more info. (Well, as I said, my info was two years old. ;-D) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing --------------------- Forwarded message: From: franks@pacifier.com (Frank Stearns) To: INDEX-L%BINGVMB.BITNET@icm1.icp.net CC: Wildefire@AOL.com Date: 96-11-15 23:32:10 EST > > In a message dated 96-11-15 13:06:04 EST, Sarah write: > > There is a Mac-based (and now, finally, Windows-based) tool for FrameMaker > called IXGEN (tm), produced by a company called FSA (Frank Stearns > Associates). It's billed as an Indexing and Marker Management Tool. I've been . . . > Lynn Moncrief > TECHindex & Docs > Technical and Scientific Indexing Hi Lynn - Indeed, we produce IXgen, and are alive and well, but note the area code change from 206 to 360. IXgen is available on Windows NT, 95, and 3.1 for FrameMaker 5, and SunOS and Solaris both FM 4 and FM5. Alas, we do not at this time have a Mac version. For more information including demos, please email us or visit our web page (in URL below). IXgen is a great time saver for those producing embedded indexes for FrameMaker. Thanks for remembering us. + -- T O L L F R E E ( I n U S A ) : 8 0 0 / 5 6 7 - 6 4 2 1 -- + + --------------------------------------------------------------------- + | Frank Stearns Associates | Developers of Tools for FrameMaker(r): | | franks@fsatools.com | IXgen, FM2A, Programmable Export Kit | | 360/892-3970 fx:360/253-1498 | Now shipping IXgen for Windows!! | + --------------------------------------------------------------------- + | http://www.pacifier.com/~franks (Email if web page access problems) | + --------------------------------------------------------------------- + ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 07:42:40 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Mac Indexing Tool for FrameMaker In a message dated 96-11-16 14:58:41 EST, Jan wrote: > There is a Windows-based indexing tool for helping out FrameMaker indexers, > called IxGen (also for Unix). Info about it is on the ASI web page. Perhaps > he could check and see if it is possible to convert the document's files > over > to the PC, get the indexing done, then take them back to the Mac? That works > with PageMaker files (graphics can get weird, but taking them back should > fix > it). Just an idea, as I do not know if Frame files can go through this kind > of conversion. Jan, As I understand it, FrameMaker files can transfer quite nicely across platforms. The main problem that I'm aware of is with extended ASCII characters, such as bullets, which the Mac has different assignments for. (Warning--this info about the character translation is a few years old, too. ;-D) According to the documentation supplied with FrameMaker 5.0, the software allows you to set preferences for importing files from another platform and can be set to notify you of all file translation errors (which beats having to look for each one manually). It also has facilities for handling those types of graphics files that don't transfer well between the PC and the Mac. In a nutshell, your advice sounds quite do-able. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing > ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 07:42:41 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Feeling insulted I recently had the wonderful experience of feeling insulted by a book I was indexing! The book is a textbook (intended for use in a formal class) for using a popular word processing program. This particular "insult" is the "Oh, computers can do that" species. In the passage on how to use the "indexing" feature, the author first recommended looking at the index to the book (which I was in the process of preparing) for getting an idea of what an indented-style index looks like. Now, that was fine, aside from the weird hallucination I had of suddenly all of these students looking over my shoulder to analyze my index, not just use it. (It was late at night when I got to this passage. OK? ;-D) Things went rapidly downhill from there. The author next said that an index lists EACH OCCURRENCE (caps in the original text) of a phrase or term in the text. Aiiiish! (See our passing mentions thread.) So, not only were the students going to look at my index for style, but they were now going to expect that I listed every occurrence of everything mentioned in the book, which I wasn't about to do!! As a hideous example, just imagine the enormous string of locators that would have resulted from listing every instance of menu choices for opening certain dialog boxes in all of the exercises!!!!! (I index only the occurence where the purpose of menu choice is explained, which is usually where the dialog it opens or whatever else it does is described.) However, the actual insult came when the author ended the section titled "Index" (which took up only half a page) with the statement "There is a better way..." then began the first paragraph of the next section, titled "The Concordance File", with the statement "It is usually far more efficient to prepare what is known as a concordance file." Nothing was said about analysis, double-posting or anything that indicates the imporance of human involvement in indexing (if one doesn't count the statement that one has to mark in the text which terms are to be included in the index or concordance). Come to think of it, I'm glad that the author told the students to look at the index in the back of the book as an example. It should become immediately clear that it obviously wasn't mindlessly generated as a concordance file. Whew!! Just imagine what would have resulted if this had been an author-created index (to knit this with yet another thread here). ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 09:53:28 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Indexers' Web Sites A few days ago, someone was kind enough to post a web site address that, in turn, gave the web site addresses of several indexers. I thought I had saved that post, but apparently it got sent to the giant bit-bucket in the sky. If anybody still has that web site info, I'd sure appreciate it. Thanks! =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 09:53:29 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Electronic Submission Tips I'm probably one of the few who has yet to actually DO this, but I haven't been asked...to submit an index via email, across the internet, etc. I wanted to test the process, though, and sent myself an index I completed on Friday. I sent it to all my email addresses, with mixed success. The file arrived at two of the addresses with that annoying =20= sprinkled throughout. I would like this not to happen. What am I doing wrong? The file arrived in perfect condition when delivered to this addres (the one you see in the header)...with the exception of a character for chi-square (which is an italic x or chi with a line over the top), which came across as a blank. Also, all the accented characters disappeared and were replaced by either commas or blank spaces. I created the index with Macrex, then took it into WordPerfect for final editing and checking. Macrex uses the ASCII character set to produce accents, and I assumed that this character set was pretty universal. (The chi-square I had to make with a WP special character set, and so I wasn't surprised that it didn't survive the transmission). I saved the index as an ASCII file before I sent it, thinking that the fewer software-peculiar commands, the better. I know this has been discussed extensively on the list before, but I never paid as much attention as I should have since it wasn't something any of my clients were interested in. I'd sure appreciate a little help here, if anybody would care to answer me in e-mail rather than cluttering up the list with what I am sure are elementary questions. Thanks so much! =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 14:44:28 -0500 Reply-To: norcross@ix.netcom.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Norcross Organization: Crossover Information Services Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips Here's everything I know about electronic submissions. Sonsie, I'm not sure this will be useful for you because I use Cindex and Microsoft Word rather than Macrex and WordPerfect, but I think the theory is the same. 1. When I attach a Word file, whatever the size, to my America Online userid, and send it to my publisher's America Online address, NO PROBLEMS. I do not convert to ASCII, I just send the .DOC file as is. 2. When I attach a .DOC file to my netcom userid (using the Netscape mail application not the NetCruiser application) the .DOC file MUST BE ZIPPED in order to send it to the publisher's AOL account. I don't know if it has to be zipped to send it to any other types of ISPs, but zipping never hurts. 3. The best way to get information about attaching files to your notes is to go to the Usenet news group that supports either your ISP or your mail application. It also might be useful to ask your client how others send files. You might have to get creative with your questions if the person doesn't know a lot about their system (e.g., What do other people's e-mail address end in? aol.com? netcom.com? mindspring.com? etc.) Another good source is other indexers or proofreaders who send files to your client; see if you can get a name or e-mail address and ask them how they do it. 4. Spend some time practicing (sounds like you already are!) before you have to send a file. When you send the file, follow-up immediately with a phone call, and, for the first few times, stay by the phone until you are sure the file was received with no problem. Good luck, and please post any other tips that come to you; I would love to understand more about this (especially why I have to zip files). Sonsie wrote: > > I'm probably one of the few who has yet to actually DO this, but I haven't > been asked...to submit an index via email, across the internet, etc. I > wanted to test the process, though, and sent myself an index I completed on > Friday. I sent it to all my email addresses, with mixed success. > > The file arrived at two of the addresses with that annoying =20= sprinkled > throughout. I would like this not to happen. What am I doing wrong? > > The file arrived in perfect condition when delivered to this addres (the one > you see in the header)...with the exception of a character for chi-square > (which is an italic x or chi with a line over the top), which came across as > a blank. Also, all the accented characters disappeared and were replaced by > either commas or blank spaces. > > I created the index with Macrex, then took it into WordPerfect for final > editing and checking. Macrex uses the ASCII character set to produce > accents, and I assumed that this character set was pretty universal. (The > chi-square I had to make with a WP special character set, and so I wasn't > surprised that it didn't survive the transmission). > > I saved the index as an ASCII file before I sent it, thinking that the fewer > software-peculiar commands, the better. > > I know this has been discussed extensively on the list before, but I never > paid as much attention as I should have since it wasn't something any of my > clients were interested in. I'd sure appreciate a little help here, if > anybody would care to answer me in e-mail rather than cluttering up the list > with what I am sure are elementary questions. Thanks so much! > > =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 14:53:47 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Barbara A. Wallace" Subject: Re: hyphens and en dashes In a message dated 96-11-15 20:49:33 EST, Lynn wrote: << Dash, em ...subentries... Dash, en ...subentries... Dash, 3-em ...subentries... Dash, 2-em ...subentries... >> ...and wondered why they were listed in this order in the index? How about: Dash, em Dash, en Dash, three-em Dash, two-em That's the only way I can make sense of the order.... Barb ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 14:57:49 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Sending files Sonsie, I would agree with all of what Ann said, plus this info: When sending files from one Internet service provider to another, it is often helpful to use an .RTF (rich text file) rather than an ASCII file. The RTF file will keep formatting intact, whereas you will lose formatting in the ASCII file. So it will retain italics, coding, etc -- which may solve your problem with the chi squared. But Ann is right -- it is often a good idea to experiment, pre-test, with your client, by sending a file in a number or formats to see which works best with their mail system. Also call and make sure that the files was received, is legible, and doesn't have a bunch of odd stuff in it. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 16:01:37 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Locatelli@AOL.COM Subject: Dispersed entries I am currently indexing volume 2 of a 3-volume series of essays on French history. I have take care of the dispersal issue with the following headnote to the index: "Unless otherwise noted, headings refer to things French, e.g., Revolution refers to the French Revolution. Headings to general topics are indicated by '(gen).' " So I have such entries as: Alienated memory (gen.), 11-14; see also Memory (gen.) . . . Historiography . . . Identity (French) Identity (gen.) Therefore, "alienated memory" clearly deals with the term in general, as opposed to specifically French terms. "Historiography" relates to French historiography, and the the entries on "Identity" are cleary delineated with the parenthetical descriptors. I could have omitted "French" in this case, but it does clarify the issue for the readers who might not have read the headnote. Otherwise, I would have had mounds of entries under "France" or "French . . ." etc. Fred Leise "Between the Lines" Indexing and Editorial Services ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 21:01:00 GMT0 Reply-To: jsampson@cix.compulink.co.uk Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: John Sampson Subject: Re: hyphens and en dashes > > Dash, em > ...subentries... > > Dash, en > ...subentries... > > Dash, 3-em > ...subentries... > > Dash, 2-em > ...subentries... > > ...in that exact order. Hmmmmm. If anyone can explain why these were > sorted > in this particular way, I'd appreciate hearing it. They are in alphabetical order if 'three' and 'two' are spelt out. :-| _John Sampson_ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 16:42:01 EST Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Nan Badgett <76400.3351@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Re: Sending files If you are sending files across the Internet to clients whose online service is different from your own, I think it would be best to send an encoded ASCII file which can be easily produced with shareware. The client then decodes the file, and all formatting is retained. I've just recently started experimenting with that. Does anyone else have experience with encoded files? Nan Badgett dba Word-a-bil-i-ty ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 13:51:53 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips At 02:44 PM 11/17/96 -0500, Ann Norcross wrote: >Here's everything I know about electronic submissions. Ann, thanks for the help! I plan to practice some more today, and see what works. If I come across anything particularly useful, I'll let you know. And BTW, I had forgotten that I =had= an AOL email address to try out. That will go on the list now as well. Thanks again. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 17:33:57 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips In a message dated 96-11-17 14:44:28 EST, Anne wrote: > Here's everything I know about electronic submissions. Sonsie, I'm not > sure this will be useful for you because I use Cindex and Microsoft Word > rather than Macrex and WordPerfect, but I think the theory is the same. > 1. When I attach a Word file, whatever the size, to my America Online > userid, and send it to my publisher's America Online address, NO > PROBLEMS. I do not convert to ASCII, I just send the .DOC file as is. Anne, True! I've even sent files to editors' *personal* AOL accounts because the the no-sweat nature of sending files to another AOL account from my own--even to the accounts of other people working in their office in a crunch!! Now, I know thousands of you out there are wondering how in the heck do I talk editors into giving me their personal email addresses. ;-D Some publishers reimburse their editors for time spent downloading files for business. These are publishers who do not have company accounts on the Net, but do see the value of electronic submissions. Or, the editor personally values electronic delivery methods to the point that he or she doesn't mind the extra minutes eaten up from their 300 freebie minutes per month. When AOL goes flat rate in December, this will become even less of an issue. I think that many editors like the idea of having the file right there, first thing in the morning when they come in, rather than having to wait until 10am for a Fedex delivery. Plus, being that it seems that almost all of my projects require tight turn-arounds (I don't know why), they'd rather have it delivered electronically rather than a day later (or having me say that I cannot turn around that project within the ridiculously short time frame given and not be able to find anyone else crazy enough to do a 400-pager in two days or a 900-pager in less than a week). BTW, Sonsie, publishers rarely ask me about delivering electronically. I always ask *them* about the possibility because it buys an extra day or two, which can become critical on projects requiring tight turn arounds. I've been so successful at arranging electronic delivery that I only have to use Fedex perhaps once every three or four months. However, I am always sure to ask them about all types of electronic delivery options, including FTP, if they have a BBS, etc. > > 2. When I attach a .DOC file to my netcom userid (using the Netscape > mail application not the NetCruiser application) the .DOC file MUST BE > ZIPPED in order to send it to the publisher's AOL account. I don't know > if it has to be zipped to send it to any other types of ISPs, but > zipping never hurts. I'm not sure, Anne, about other ISPs' mail gateways, but AOL's will break up any file (including ASCII files) into pieces if it's too large for the gateway. Netcom's used to as well, BTW. (I'm speaking specifically of sending files over the Net, not to another account on the same provider.) A client once sent me a file from their own domain for embedding that was about a megabyte to my AOL address. This was a FrameMaker .MIF file, which is pure ASCII. It arrived in at least 10 pieces!!! ;-D (No, I didn't strip the headers out and try to stitch it back together. We made other arrangements.) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 17:34:00 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: hyphens and en dashes In a message dated 96-11-17 14:57:35 EST, you write: > Dash, em > > Dash, en > > Dash, three-em > > Dash, two-em > > That's the only way I can make sense of the order.... > > Barb > Barb and John, Thanks to both of you! Now, why didn't I think of that except that I was posting to Index-L after an all-nighter instead of sleeping? But IMHO, this is a case where bending the rule about sorting numbers would have been a lot more intuitive. I think it looks rather odd this way. ;-D (After all, the numbers aren't the first character of the entire entry, and isn't equivalent to sorting 486 microprocessor in the f's, for example.) If anyone else has any opinions on how numbers *should* be sorted in this type of situation, fire when ready. (Geesh, I hope whoever created that index isn't ready to kill me by now if reading this.) Thanks again. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 18:35:36 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Locatelli@AOL.COM Subject: Re: hyphens and en dashes One of the difficulties in sorting 3-em and 2-em in logical order (putting 2-em first) is that an en dash is shorter that an em dash. So do we now use: Dash, en Dash, em Dash, 2-em Dash, 3-em ??? (tongue slightly in cheek) Fred Leise "Between the Lines" Indexing and Editorial Services ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 20:07:48 -0500 Reply-To: INDEX-L LIST Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Norcross Organization: Crossover Information Services Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips (I'm following up Leslie's personal note here because I think that's where she meant to send it. I've fixed my Reply-To header!) LLFEdServ@aol.com wrote: > > Ann (and others who compress files) > I have always used AOL to AOL delivery, so I have never had to worry about > zipping files. I am curious though, in case I need to someday, what tool(s) > you use to compress the files. And, what if the editor/pub doesn't have the > tools to decompress? I think I remember Lynn telling a story about sending an > index divided into parts....? Is that common? Lastly, can you download the > compressing/decompressing files on AOL? > Thanks for the info. > Leslie I've never seen a file sent AOL-to-AOL get divided into parts, nor have I needed to compress it. I don't know if I've just been lucky, or if that's part of the magic of AOL-to-AOL transfer. If I understand correctly, it is only when going from other-to-AOL or AOL-to-other that the compressing and dividing become important. With that said, the compression tool I use is PKZip, available as free- or share-ware from www.shareware.com. I tried to use its big brother, WinZIP, and I am simply too technology-challenged to handle it. I just don't get it, and since I am usually ZIPping, and UNZIPping very late at night or very, very early in the morning, I need a simple, Ann-proof (read, "idiot-proof) interface. I've only had to read the PKZip documentation 4 times! And yes, I've sent a zipped file to myself on AOL, downloaded and unzipped it. Oh. Perhaps you meant can you download the tool?? Yes, just hop over to http://www.shareware.com for the URL, and then search the shareware site for PKZIP (or any other compression tool you may hear about as others respond to this thread.) As for client compatibility, I called my contact and asked if she ever received ZIPPED files from other indexers. She said it was no problem. If she had said "no" or "huh?" we might have been in trouble! Ann Norcross ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 17:37:53 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips At 05:33 PM 11/17/96 -0500, Wildefire@AOL.COM wrote: >BTW, Sonsie, publishers rarely ask me about delivering electronically. I >always ask *them* about the possibility because it buys an extra day or two, >which can become critical on projects requiring tight turn arounds. I've been >so successful at arranging electronic delivery that I only have to use Fedex >perhaps once every three or four months. However, I am always sure to ask >them about all types of electronic delivery options, including FTP, if they >have a BBS, etc. I value that extra turnaround time, too, which is why I want to master this method and soon! Thanks for the help. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 21:47:27 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Norcross Organization: Crossover Information Services Subject: Water Cooler Chat: Long night Hope the subject line made it clear that this is NOT very work-related. :-) I was just wondering if anyone else was up late working tonight? I've been plugging away at this darn book since 6:00am this morning, and am not done yet! Partly due to procrastination, partly because I burned my hand on Friday and lost an etire day's work. :-( Anyway, I'm just taking a little break, and a stoll over to our virtual water cooler, and thought I'd see if anyone was around. Ann ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 21:47:52 EST Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Fred Brown <75324.1707@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Dialog boxes and windows I am indexing a computer software manual which makes a distinction between dialog boxes and windows. Windows contain lists of data. The user may select an item from the list and choose an action that pulls up a dialog box. The dialog box then contains fields which the user may enter or update. While the manual makes a clear distinction in how it uses dialog boxes and windows, I am not sure that a harried user will. How do I meet the expectations of the user while respecting intent of the author? My preferred option is to use "See also" cross-references although "See also" references usually point to more specific detail on the same topic and not to near synonyms: dialog boxes, About PERMIT SNMS 4.8 add initial certification password 3.12 add/edit group name 6.17, 6.18 add/edit permission 3.10 certificate information 6.3 certification information 6.5 change password 3.2 dynamic address groups 6.17, 6.18 options 6.8 permissions 3.9 PERMIT SNMS setup 2.5 preferences 3.5 remove client 6.16 revoke/hold 6.10, 6.14 See also windows windows, Administrator 3.4 event history 8.2 options 6.2 PERMIT SNMS setup 2.5 SNMS main 4.1-4.8 See also dialog boxes Another option is to merge the two main entries. While possibly more intuitive for the reader, this option disturbs the differentiation in meaning used by the author: dialog boxes / windows, About PERMIT SNMS 4.8 add initial certification password 3.12 add/edit group name 6.17, 6.18 add/edit permission 3.10 administrator 3.4 certificate information 6.3 certification information 6.5 change password 3.2 dynamic address groups 6.17, 6.18 event history 8.2 options 6.2, 6.8 permissions 3.9 PERMIT SNMS setup 2.5 preferences 3.5 remove client 6.16 revoke/hold 6.10, 6.14 SNMS main 4.1-4.8 windows. See dialog boxes / windows In both cases, each sub-entry (dialog box or window) in also posted as a main entry. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 00:06:32 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: LLFEdServ@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Water Cooler Chat: Long night Ann, I'm up late every night. I have just moved to Sacramento (completely by force) along with my husband (the evil one who got the new job) and 3-year-old son. I came with projects going and of course have no day care. I may have found one, but that will take a couple of weeks to get started. In the meantime, the evil one went off for a two-week training trip to Green Bay! Needless to say, I'm going nuts trying to work; take care of moving in, organizing, etc.; keep my son happy and adjusted; and adjust myself. Before the move, the evil one promised me that this would be a great situation because his work hours are from 6 am to 3 pm. He said he'd be home early so I could get work done and not worry about the transition. He'd be there to help. HA HA. He's been working til 5 or 6 (ah, the excitement of a new job). When he comes home, I'm going to have to search the planet for the elixir that changes him from evil to good. No, he's going to have to find the elixir. I'm too busy:) Anyway, I'm here too at the late night water cooler. Leslie ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 00:15:33 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DStaub11@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Water Cooler Chat: Long night Well, I'm here but just trying to relax a little after a very long parenting day. Five hours of swim meet (yesterday the same)--it's our first and I can't believe the amounts of time they expect from parents! We skipped out before helping to clean up the pool building afterwards, too (bad, bad). And then violin practice and cooking dinner. Sigh. Can't wait to get back to my nice relaxing Asian regional integration index tomorrow morning! Hang in there, everybody. Do Mi ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 01:13:43 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: GVHatch@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Water Cooler Chat: Long night It's so nice to read postings from other late-night workers! I tend to work this late all of the time because my children don't allow for much work to be done until they are well in dreamland. I'm just finishing an index on child custody. For once, I found a client who lives 5 minutes from me!!! It makes turn-around time a lot easier. I'm also in the middle of writing up a publicity article for a local ASI conference coming up in Feb. A newsletter editor wants to use the article as her lead article for the Dec. issue, only problem is she goes to press on Weds., I found all of this out on Sat. Love the opportunities, hate the fact that I only have 24 hours in a day and can only work for 12-15 of them (depending on the day). Good luck all! Gaylene Hatch ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 02:37:14 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Michael & Cheryl Dietsch Subject: Re: Dialog boxes and windows I also index computer books, and whenever I run across situations similar to the one you describe I use "see also" references between the two headings -- just like the first option you stated. To me, the "see also" references are clearer to the reader than a "see" reference would be since the main entry terms are not totally synonymous. I also try to stay as close to the author's terms and their meanings as possible since I figure the author knows more about the subject matter than I do (I certainly hope so anyway!) so if the author wants to differentiate terms then I should do the same. Cheryl Dietsch Fred Brown wrote: > > I am indexing a computer software manual which makes a distinction between > dialog boxes and > windows. Windows contain lists of data. The user may select an item from the > list and choose an action that pulls up a dialog box. The dialog box then > contains fields which the user may enter or update. > > While the manual makes a clear distinction in how it uses dialog boxes and > windows, I am not sure that a harried user will. How do I meet the expectations > of the user while respecting intent of the author? > > My preferred option is to use "See also" cross-references although "See also" > references usually point to more specific detail on the same topic and not to > near synonyms: > > dialog boxes, About PERMIT SNMS 4.8 > add initial certification password 3.12 > add/edit group name 6.17, 6.18 > add/edit permission 3.10 > certificate information 6.3 > certification information 6.5 > change password 3.2 > dynamic address groups 6.17, 6.18 > options 6.8 > permissions 3.9 > PERMIT SNMS setup 2.5 > preferences 3.5 > remove client 6.16 > revoke/hold 6.10, 6.14 > See also windows > > windows, Administrator 3.4 > event history 8.2 > options 6.2 > PERMIT SNMS setup 2.5 > SNMS main 4.1-4.8 > See also dialog boxes > > Another option is to merge the two main entries. While possibly more intuitive > for the reader, this option disturbs the differentiation in meaning used by the > author: > > dialog boxes / windows, About PERMIT SNMS 4.8 > add initial certification password 3.12 > add/edit group name 6.17, 6.18 > add/edit permission 3.10 > administrator 3.4 > certificate information 6.3 > certification information 6.5 > change password 3.2 > dynamic address groups 6.17, 6.18 > event history 8.2 > options 6.2, 6.8 > permissions 3.9 > PERMIT SNMS setup 2.5 > preferences 3.5 > remove client 6.16 > revoke/hold 6.10, 6.14 > SNMS main 4.1-4.8 > > windows. See dialog boxes / windows > > In both cases, each sub-entry (dialog box or window) in also posted as a main > entry. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 01:00:08 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Sachs Subject: Re: Dialog boxes and windows By all means use "See also" references. In addition, though, I recommend adding entries for "Windows / Dialog boxes, distinguished from" and "Dialog boxes / Windows, distinguished from." I've found that some of the most useful information in an index can be contained in entries like these. If the reader ever knew that there is a distinction between windows and dialog boxes, just seeing the entry will jog her memory. She probably won't have to look up the reference, either; just the fact that she can't find what she wants under Windows (or Dialog Boxes) will be enough to send her to the entry for Dialog Boxes (or Windows). Jonathan Sachs Sand River Software, Inc. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 08:46:13 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rachel Rice Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips Hi Sonsie, I have 2 clients who both use Macs as I do. I send my indexes to them as a Word 5.1 file in RTF format, not ASCII. Both of them say they get it intact and have no problems at all. I haven't ever done this with someone who uses non-Mac but if they have Wordperfect or any other up-to-date wordprocessing or page layout program, they should have no trouble opening any RTF file created in any up-to-date program. I send to one of them via FTP to their site, and the other as an attached email file (using Eudora). I'm curious to know if it will work as smoothly when I have to send to someone with a PC system. Try using RTF instead of ASCII and let me know what happens. I want to know about Mac to PC transfers if anyone has done that. RR Rachel Rice Directions Unlimited Desktop Services Chilmark, Mass. rachelr@tiac.net; http://www.tiac.net/users/rachelr/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 09:25:51 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Richard T. Evans" Subject: Re: Dialog boxes and windows At 09:47 PM 11/17/96 EST, you wrote: >My preferred option is to use "See also" cross-references although "See also" >references usually point to more specific detail on the same topic and not to >near synonyms: I've never interpreted them that way. I think this is an ideal use of See also. Dick ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 09:29:13 -0500 Reply-To: wgm@sageline.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "William G. Meisheid" Organization: Sageline Publishing Subject: Re: Dialog boxes and windows Fred, One additional thing you may want to consider is getting yourself "The Microsoft Manual of Style for Technical Publications" (ISBN 1-55615-939-0). This is the preferred style guide for the Windows environment. You did not say if the program you are indexing is a Windows program or not, which would affect my answers, since in Windows, everything is technically a "window" and the word seldom stands alone without a modifier or modifying context. -- William Meisheid "Thoughts still and always in progress" Certified RoboHELP Training WUGNET/Hypertext Technologies Styles/Concepts/Etc. sysop on CIS Sageline Publishing www.sageline.com wgm@sageline.com 410.465.1548 Fax: 410.744.2456 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 09:52:01 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips In a message dated 96-11-17 20:10:01 EST, you write: > > LLFEdServ@aol.com wrote: > > > > Ann (and others who compress files) > > I have always used AOL to AOL delivery, so I have never had to worry about > > zipping files. I am curious though, in case I need to someday, what tool(s) > > > you use to compress the files. And, what if the editor/pub doesn't have > the > > tools to decompress? I think I remember Lynn telling a story about sending > an > > index divided into parts....? Is that common? Lastly, can you download the > > compressing/decompressing files on AOL? > > Thanks for the info. > > Leslie Leslie, Yes, I did tell a story about dividing a file into parts. ;-D The index was a pretty large file and I couldn't compress it because the client did not have PKUNZIP or WinZIP to decompress it. (This is why it is essential to find out what the client has on their end.) I felt it was better if *I* was the one to break it into parts rather than some mindless computer on the Net. It worked fine, if you don't consider that it was a mindless indexer who forgot to send the E's, not a mindless computer. ;-D I don't know if anyone else has ever tried that as an alternative to compressing files. Anne said in reply to Leslie: >I've never seen a file sent AOL-to-AOL get divided into parts, nor have >I needed to compress it. I don't know if I've just been lucky, or if >that's part of the magic of AOL-to-AOL transfer. If I understand >correctly, it is only when going from other-to-AOL or AOL-to-other that >the compressing and dividing become important. It's part of the magic of AOL-to-AOL transfer. There's no need to compress nor encode files sent between AOL accounts, regardless of size. It's when one has to transfer files from AOL to somewhere on the Internet or from somewhere on the Internet to AOL where all of these gnarly file transfer issues arise. And, BTW, I agree that the interface and documentation for all of PKWare's stuff (WinZIP, WinCode, and their DOS forerunners) is an absolute nightmare--it's not just you, believe me!!!! And it doesn't help that we're usually doing this at o'dark o'clock or in that panic-fog of trying to get an index out on time. ;-D This whole thread inspired me to run a test (especially Sonsie's experience with the Chi character). So I found an old index full of Greek characters, subscripts and superscripts and even plus/minus signs (where the + is superimposed over the - sign). I zipped and UUENCODED it, then sent it from my Netcom account to my AOL account. I downloaded it from AOL and was surprised to find that AOL's software decided to take it upon itself to decode the file!!!!!! It said that it was extracting it, as in unzipping it, but WinCode told me that there was nothing to do when I tried to decode it whereas WinZip unzipped it with no error messages or anything. Anyway, I brought the file into Word and all of the Greek characters and even the plus/minus sign came through intact. Being that AOL has decided to inject itself as a variable in my little test (it having suspiciously decided to download an upgrade right when I was in the middle of doing this), I'll have to rerun this test a few times to find out exactly what software is doing what here. OTOH, it somehow incorporated another encoded test file (that was an attachment) I had sent to myself INTO the email message accompanying it, then said the message was too long and sent the rest as a file. (Either Netcom or AOL goofed up on this one.) Aiiiish!!!!!!! One thing I'd like to be able to do is to assure clients that this works flawlessly all the time and I'm determined to do that. Stay tuned. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 09:52:05 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Dialog boxes and windows In a message dated 96-11-17 21:52:36 EST, you write: > I am indexing a computer software manual which makes a distinction between > dialog boxes and > windows. Windows contain lists of data. The user may select an item from > the > list and choose an action that pulls up a dialog box. The dialog box then > contains fields which the user may enter or update. > > While the manual makes a clear distinction in how it uses dialog boxes and > windows, I am not sure that a harried user will. How do I meet the > expectations > of the user while respecting intent of the author? Fred, I think you've run into that wall that we sometimes run into when indexing software manuals, which is not actually having the software itself to play with. I'm saying this because windows and dialog boxes are usually two distinctively different components of the user interface and most users (however harried) can tell the difference, IMHO. Even from what you said about how the dialog boxes are invoked and what the user does with them, I believe that they are relatively distinct creatures in this particular software package. I also suspect that, given the type of subentries you listed in your message, this particular group of users is more advanced (possibly MIS types) than the average end-user as this sounds like network administration or server software. Now, having thrown a ton of suppositions at you, I'll risk really having egg on my face and strongly recommend against merging the two main entries. The only subentry that the two have in common is the "PERMIT SNMS setup", so merging them implies a stronger relationship between them than what actually exists. Not only is this at odds with the author's intention, but I don't think this serves the users. As for creating reciprocal "See also" refs at the windows and dialog boxes main headings, while I don't think it would hurt anything, I don't think it's all that necessary. The only interface components that I consistently create See also refs for are list boxes, combination boxes and drop-down boxes in programming texts because they are rather similar in appearance, how they're programmed, etc. I strongly agree with your posting each dialog box and window subentry as a main entry. BTW, I don't know how far you are into this index but, being that a lot of software has a huge number of dialog boxes, you may find yourself with an enormous subentry list by classifying each dialog box under a dialog box main heading. Then again, it may work quite nicely in this particular index. Another BTW... are the names of these windows and dialog boxes in lowercase in the text, as they are in your subentries? That's slightly unusual, if they are. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 09:23:32 +0000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Authenticated sender is From: banden@ATLAS.AXIOM.NET Subject: Feeling insulted/value of indexing Concerning insulting comments from those ignorant of the indexing process: I came to indexing several years ago from being a reference librarian, a professional index user. I had intimate knowledge of the general public's use of indexes, since I spent a good deal of time teaching people how to find information. With this background, I know that the fact that some people cannot be convinced of the value of indexing has no bearing on its true value and meaning. I get my share of blank looks when I now say that I index books. I tend to simulate holding a book in my hands and flipping to the back for the index (must be a habit from the reference librarian days). Since most people knew me as the public library's reference librarian I like to say that I have turned my skills inside out and am using them in a new way. When I'm discouraged or starting to glaze over while finishing up an index I like to visualize my former reference librarian self relishing the detail I've included and the wonderful cross references I've interwoven into the structure that help me locate that information quickly for the demanding library user. To quote my husband (musician and son of a librarian): "Anyone who doesn't know the value of a good index is a fool!" Stepping down from the soapbox, Kay Banning ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 10:26:14 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: GLASSMANDL@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips Rachel asked about Mac to PC transfers. I've got a Mac at home, my wife has a PC at work. Just to test the system, I've sent WordPerfect RTF indexes as an attached file from my AOL mail to her non-AOL mailbox which she has had no problem opening in Word without error. Don ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 10:31:09 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Seth A. Maislin" Subject: Re: Dialog boxes and windows Fred, What about using something like "see under specific dialog box or window"? - Seth > While the manual makes a clear distinction in how it uses dialog boxes and > windows, I am not sure that a harried user will. How do I meet the > expectations of the user while respecting intent of the author? -- 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) 661-1116 facsimile smaislin@world.std.com WWW: http://www.ora.com/people/staff/seth ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 10:24:00 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Suzanne Nichols Please get me off of the INDEX'L and multiple recipients list ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 08:34:48 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips At 08:46 AM 11/18/96 -0400, Rachel Rice wrote: >Try using RTF instead of ASCII and let me know what happens. I want to know >about Mac to PC transfers if anyone has done that. Rachel, that's my project for today...more practice files. I'm pretty sure that WP 6.0 can create .RTF files, so that's what I'll use. Thanks! =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 08:34:49 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips At 09:52 AM 11/18/96 -0500, Wildefire@AOL.COM wrote: >This whole thread inspired me to run a test (especially Sonsie's experience >with the Chi character). So I found an old index full of Greek characters, >subscripts and superscripts and even plus/minus signs (where the + is >superimposed over the - sign). I zipped and UUENCODED it, then sent it from >my Netcom account to my AOL account. I downloaded it from AOL and was >surprised to find that AOL's software decided to take it upon itself to >decode the file!!!!!! Lynn, here's another question. When and why do you have to UUENCODE? Apparently my Eudora version will do this for me if I simply click on the proper icon (I don't have to manually encode anything), but I don't know when to use it. More tests coming, I see... =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 12:38:29 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JanCW@AOL.COM Subject: Re: PC Magazine citation The article that mentioned bad indexes as a leading cause of user dismay was in PC Computing, actually (well, I was close....) Grech, Christine. 1992 "Computer Documentation Doesn't Pass Muster." PC Computing, April, 212-214 I'm posting it to the list since I got a few requests for the citation. It's listed in Nancy Mulvany's book, too. Jan Wright ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 12:42:20 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Water Cooler Chat: Long night Oh, this water-cooler long-night thread is so cool! You'll almost always find me around the water cooler late at night unless deadline crunching. I've done so many all-nighters that I've permanently wrecked my sleep cycles to the extent that I'm up all night almost every night, just catching a nap whenever I nod off. In the last month or so, I realized that I'm absolutely miserable when I officially go to bed for the night (waking up every two to three hours as if I'm just napping in a deadline crunch), so I simply don't go to bed for the night anymore. Problem solved. ;-D This is nowhere near as bad as it sounds. It makes pulling all-nighters much easier because I'm always in that mode. The only drawbacks are higher electric bills because lights, TV, Mr. Coffee, and computers are running 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. My semi-retired, fellow night-owl hubby, has also fallen into this up-all-night, occasional-nap mode (though his naps are way longer than mine). Three A.M. often finds us both sitting at the computers (side-by-side in our office where we seem to stay almost 24 hrs a day) gabbing away (unless actually working). Being that the window over our computers faces east, we watch the sunrise almost every morning together, wishing everyone else in the house a good day as they go off to work and we continue on with our eternal "day". The only major problem with this is that I have a hard time telling what day of the week it is because life is one, long, extended "day"... but then the computer will tell me what day it is in an instant whenever I want to know. (Geesh, without Win95, I'd have to go back to checking the newspaper to find out what day it is.) So, Anne, just give a holler whenever it's late at night and the hour is dark and cold. One of us night owls is always here. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 10:15:48 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sarah Lee Bihlmayer Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips Rachel writes: >I have 2 clients who both use Macs as I do. I send my indexes to them as a >Word 5.1 file in RTF format, not ASCII. Both of them say they get it intact >and have no problems at all. I haven't ever done this with someone who uses >non-Mac but if they have Wordperfect or any other up-to-date wordprocessing >or page layout program, they should have no trouble opening any RTF file >created in any up-to-date program. > >I send to one of them via FTP to their site, and the other as an attached >email file (using Eudora). I'm curious to know if it will work as smoothly >when I have to send to someone with a PC system. I can definitively tell you that RTF files work seamlessly across platforms. I have numerous clients with whom I do this exact type of file transfer--I work on both platforms and use the same files on both my computers this way with no translation errors whatsoever. I've not tried it with customers who use WordPerfect, but I suspect it would be no problem--I do know it works like a dream with Word. RTF is a Microsoft proprietary format, and it has become a standard because it's also the coding language for Windows online help. Its reliability as a standard may change soon, however--because MS plans to switch to HTML as the coding language for its help systems with the release of Win97. But for now, this method definitely works! Sarah |Sarah Lee Bihlmayer * Intranet Documentation Specialist | |Site Development * Content Creation * Content Management| | Technical Writing * Developmental Editing * Indexing | | 415-207-4046 * sarahlee@contentmanage.com | ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 13:32:40 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Norcross Organization: Crossover Information Services Subject: Re: Water Cooler Chat: Long night Greetings to all the many, many INDEX-Lers who chatted with me off-list (and on) last night. It kept me going, and I feel much more a part of a community rather than just a lonesome indexer. Thank you, and good night. :-) Ann ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 13:43:46 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Norcross Organization: Crossover Information Services Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips Oh boy! Something I can answer! > OTOH, it somehow incorporated another encoded test file (that was > an attachment) I had sent to myself INTO the email message accompanying it, > then said the message was too long and sent the rest as a file. (Either > Netcom or AOL goofed up on this one.) Aiiiish!!!!!!! One thing I'd like to > be able to do is to assure clients that this works flawlessly all the time > and I'm determined to do that. Stay tuned. ;-D > > Lynn Moncrief > TECHindex & Docs > Technical and Scientific Indexing When an attached file is too big for AOL to handle, that's what happens. It looks like the file gets embedded in the note, and is basically all screwed up. You need to compress the attached file (which is different than encoding it, right? I think so). Compressing makes it smaller, encoding doesn't (again, I think that's right but I am open to correction). That's why I had to get PKZip, for those Netcom-to-AOL transfers to work. According to the netscape newsgroup, this is an AOL problem/limitation, not a netscape or netcom problem. But then all non-AOLers feel that all problems are AOL problems, n'est-ce pas? (Small over-generalization... maybe.) Anyway, Zip and send again and let us know if it works! A. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 10:51:02 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips At 10:26 AM 11/18/96 -0500, GLASSMANDL@AOL.COM wrote: >Rachel asked about Mac to PC transfers. >I've got a Mac at home, my wife has a PC at work. >Just to test the system, I've sent WordPerfect RTF indexes as an attached >file from my AOL mail to her non-AOL mailbox which she has had no problem >opening in Word without error. This is good to know! So many of us work cross-platform in one way or another, and cross-Internet as well. I'm glad =something= works right. :-) I just ran another series of tests, using the .RTF file format and sending to all my email addresses. Eudora-to-Eudora worked so seamlessly that it automatically opened WordPerfect and the test index when I double-clicked on the attached file name in the incoming message. Talk about service... And AOL worked flawlessly as well, though I had to open WP all by myself. ;-> For those of you who may be using free Juno email accounts, the upper size limit on an email message is a bit over 64K. So don't send anything lengthy that way! =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 11:00:10 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Michael Brackney Subject: Re: hyphens and en dashes Fellow L-ers: I forwarded my comments about the use of en dashes in compound adjectives and my query thereon >I would like to see a passage in some grammar or style manual on the use of en dashes >or em dashes in compound adjectives in which none of the elements is an open or a >hyphenated compound, as in "predator--prey relationships". plus a couple more examples of same to Susanna Sturgis, the copy editor friend Rachel Rice recommended. With Susanna's permission I'm forwarding her reply to all of you. Im my response to her I said, "I very much appreciate your comments and feel well set straight". >From: s.sturgis2@genie.com >Date: Sat, 16 Nov 96 15:48:00 GMT >To: brackney@nccn.net >X-genie-QK-From: S.STURGIS2 >X-genie-QK-Id: 0458426 >X-genie-Gateway-Id: 432391 >Subject: Re: hyphens and en dashes > >Greetings! > >"Predator-prey relationship" and "father-son relationship" look like simple >compounds to me, though there's no exact analogy in _Chicago_'s famous Table >6.1 -- no "noun + noun used as an adjective," iow. WORDS INTO TYPE (3rd) >discusses "temporary compounds" on p. 226: > >"Two words connected by a hyphen to show their syntactical relation to >another word may be termed a temporary compound, in contradistinction to the >permanent compounds whose form is determined by usage and is usually given >in dictionaries." > >If someone wrote an article on relationships between fathers and sons-in- >law, the subject would surely be the father--son-in-law relationship, with > "--" representing an en-dash. > >"Baltimore-Washington Parkway" (I remember it well!) is clearly a temporary >compound. An en-dash would indicate that the word "Baltimore" was being >linked to the open compound "Washington Parkway," which is clearly not the >case. The Parkway, as it were, links Baltimore and Washington. > >I've never seen an em-dash used in the way you mention; possibly it's a >convention for some scientific publishing?? > >Hope this makes sense. > >_Chicago_'s index has driven me nuts through at least three editions. It >and I do not approach things in the same way. _Words Into Type_, on the >other hand, is a pleasure. Unfortunately, it covers different ground, and >it hasn't been revised in more than 20 years. > > >Susanna J. Sturgis > Copyeditor/Proofreader > P.O. Box 39 > West Tisbury, MA 02575 > > Brackney Indexing Service 134 Kathleen Way Grass Valley, CA 95945 916-272-7088 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 15:06:21 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: GVHatch@AOL.COM Subject: Annual Conference, ASI So. Calif. Chapter, Feb. 8, 1997 The American Society of Indexers' Southern California Chapter invites you to our 1997 annual conference Theme: Building Your Indexing Business Hyatt Regency Long Beach, on the water near Shoreline Drive, 200 South Pine Avenue, Long Beach, CA 90802 (310-491-1234) Saturday, February 8, a full day of presentations plus networking from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (Friday, February 7 will feature an informal reception and no-host bar at about 5:00 p.m., followed by dinner out.) Perfect Location, Beautiful Business: Come and enjoy the gorgeous weather, the world-famous area attractions, the outstanding outdoor activities; all make southern California a superior destination. This is especially true during February, when Long Beach has an average daytime temperature of 65 to 70 degrees F (above zero). Leave your snow boots at home, bring your sunglasses, and plan to relax in the sunshine after learning about building your freelance indexing business. Registration fee (includes continental breakfast and lunch): If registered before Jan. 4 (5 weeks early): ASI members, $65, non-members $75. If registered between Jan. 5 and Jan. 25 (2 weeks early): $85/$95. If registering after Jan. 25 or at the door: $100/$110. Cost of hotel room: $112 per night. Featured topics: --Frances Lennie will speak on "Beyond Basic Indexing: How to Approach Revisions, Cumulations, and Spin-Off Indexes" --Mort Wedner: "Income and Asset Protection for the Self-Employed Indexer: Taking the Mystery Out of Disability Income and Individual Long Term Care Plans" --Ann Blum will offer suggestions on "How to Increase Productivity in Your Business" --Panel: "Building an Indexing Career . . . in the Moonlight?" ...a panel discussion by freelancers who are also employed or occupied full-time in other jobs. The panel will feature Bonny McLaughlin, Micki Taylor and Gaylene Hatch. --Both of the popular indexing programs, Cindex and Macrex, will have demo tables. Also, in addition to and independent of our program, Cindex and Macrex will each offer a seminar for existing users of their programs, for a small fee. Contact them directly for more information at macrex@aol.com and ircindex@aol.com. How to register: Information and an email version of the registration form are available from E. Micki Taylor at EMickiT@aol.com. Please include the following information with your check and snail mail it to the address below: your filled-out e-mail registration form, or a sheet with your name, telephone, street address, city, state, and Zip. Each conferee will receive a list of the conferees and their addresses; if you do not want your name on this list, please so indicate on your enclosure. If you wish to share a hotel room with another conferee, say so and we'll be a clearinghouse. Send your check, made out to ASI SoCal, to E. Micki Taylor, 613 N. Plymouth Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90004-1420. If you have questions, call Micki (but not before 10:00 a.m. please) at (213) 465-0827 or e-mail her at EMickiT@aol.com. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 16:01:10 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Karl E. Vogel" Organization: Control Data Systems Inc. Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips >> On Mon, 18 Nov 1996 08:34:49 -0800, >> Sonsie said: S> When and why do you have to UUENCODE? Apparently my Eudora version will do S> this for me if I simply click on the proper icon (I don't have to manually S> encode anything), but I don't know when to use it. You have to run some type of encoding program any time your mail includes a character that can't be represented in 7-bit ASCII. In other words, if you're using anything but the alphanumeric or punctuation keys on a regular keyboard. The nifty things in most word-processors (bold, italic, etc.) are almost always represented by a character with the highest bit on. A lot of older mail-delivery packages assume 8-bit characters have the highest bit off, and they get really upset with messages that break this rule. I think a lot of this came from early lack of agreement on what given special 8-bit characters meant; the only thing close to a standard was 7-bit ASCII. -- Karl Vogel vogelke@c17.wpafb.af.mil 513-255-3688 Control Data Systems, Inc. ASC/YCOA, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433 Sped up my XT; ran it on 220v! Works greO?_~" --Ken Applin ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 15:12:52 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helvettia Martell Subject: Journal Indexing or Rates Again! I am interested in indexing a scholarly journal on Latin American Studies/Literature. The articles are writen in Spanish, Portuguese and/or English. I want to sell the editors the idea of publishing an index to their entire collection for their 25th anniversary. Could someone tell me how to charge for this type of index? (page, issue, year, entry, etc.?) and what would the going rate be? I want to quote a standard/fair rate for this job. Even if I don't get the job, I am still interested in learning about this. Thank you very much. Helvetia Martell ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 19:22:53 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips In a message dated 96-11-18 16:59:33 EST, Sonsie wrote: > > Lynn, here's another question. When and why do you have to UUENCODE? > Apparently my Eudora version will do this for me if I simply click on the > proper icon (I don't have to manually encode anything), but I don't know > when to use it. Sonsie, Eudora supports MIME which protects certain non-ASCII files from being trashed when going over the Net, so that's why you don't have to do it with Eudora. Even the NetCruiser mailreader supplied with my Netcom account supports MIME. Please don't ask for a spellout of this acronym. It was many indexes ago when I came across the spellout. ;-D Anyway, as I recall from what it said in that book I indexed on the Internet, MIME recognizes certain file extensions, .DOC being one of them. The bottom line is that AOL's mailreader doesn't seem to do this as files sent from AOL over the net without encoding (converted to ASCII) arrived trashed at the other end (aside from being in bits and pieces). At least it used to as recently as August, the last time I tried to send a binary file from AOL. I'll tell you what... As a test, send me a file, perhaps even that one with the Chi character. It doesn't matter if it's WordPerfect or Word, as I have both. If you send it as a .DOC file, just as it was saved from your word processor, we'll give AOL, MIME, Eudora a good test!!! ;-D I'll let you know what happens. It may be that AOL's latest upgrade has finally brought it into 1996 when it comes to email. Sending and receiving files unscathed across the Net from AOL is even more important to me than being able to send black-on-black email to other AOL'ers. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 19:22:55 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips In a message dated 96-11-18 15:22:32 EST, Ann wrote: > When an attached file is too big for AOL to handle, that's what > happens. It looks like the file gets embedded in the note, and is > basically all screwed up. You need to compress the attached file (which > is different than encoding it, right? I think so). Ann, Oh geeesh! The darn thing was only 35k!!!! I thought AOL could handle 64K by now, since the WHOLE REST OF THE WORLD went to 64K. Thanks!! (I hadn't zipped it, knowing that Netcom could handle it, not thinking that AOL is still using a fly-weight mail gateway. ...sigh... It seems that AOL works best when my husband and I use it to transfer files between our computers.) You're right that compressing is different than encoding. ;-D >Compressing makes > it smaller, encoding doesn't (again, I think that's right but I am open > to correction). That's why I had to get PKZip, for those Netcom-to-AOL > transfers to work. According to the netscape newsgroup, this is an AOL > problem/limitation, not a netscape or netcom problem. But then all > non-AOLers feel that all problems are AOL problems, n'est-ce pas? Oui. ;-D And they're right this time. (Wow, the netscape newsgroup must have taken time off from bashing Netcom for this one. ;-D Why do I have accounts with the two most problematic providers? Both of them have crashed so spectacularly that it made the papers! I'm getting better though. I ditched Earthlink. ;-D) > (Small over-generalization... maybe.) Anyway, Zip and send again and > let us know if it works! Will do. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 09:37:51 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Susan Holbert Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips When sending attachments from PC to PC, I set Eudora to MIME format (3rd button on my toolbar). When sending to a Mac, I must change it to BinHex. I don't know how this would work in reverse. Susan Holbert "Training workshops and videos" INDEXING SERVICES 24 Harris Steet Waltham, MA 02154-6105 617-893-0514 susanh@world.std.com http://www.abbington.com/holbert/index.html ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 10:34:26 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Copyediting Do some of you do copyediting as well as indexing? I am phasing out the copyediting part of my freelance business and am starting to gather names of other freelancers who do want to do copyediting, to pass them along to my clients. In particular, I'm looking for people with experience editing mss. in the humanities for university presses. Please reply off-list if you're interested. (Yes, I already know about Copyediting-L.) Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | I'm not into working out. My Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | philosophy: No pain, no pain. Milwaukee, WI | -- Carol Leifer ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 11:41:18 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Karl E. Vogel" Organization: Control Data Systems Inc. Subject: Relief of carpal tunnel discomfort EXERCISE PAIN AWAY...[IndustryWeek, page 68, 11/4/96] To relieve the discomfort of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), make a fist, then open it and wiggle your fingers. A study of 81 people with CTS who were taught hand and wrist exercises at the Orthopaedic & Reconstructive Center in Oklahoma City proved that this exercise may provide effective pain relief. Participants found that one minute of exercising often gave hours of relief from painful pressure on the median nerve, which causes CTS. -- Karl Vogel vogelke@c17.wpafb.af.mil ...in the lexicon of the political class, the word "sacrifice" means that the citizens are supposed to mail even more of their income to Washington so that the political class will not have to sacrifice the pleasure of spending it. --George Will, Newsweek, 22-Feb-1993 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:06:28 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elizabeth Farr Subject: Re: Electronic Submission Tips In-Reply-To: <199611182109.NAA19426@mx5.u.washington.edu> Sarah, Besides being a beginning indexing student, I'm finishing up my MA in linguistics. This thread about Mac to PC transfers has inspired me to delurk and add my .02. I frequently download papers in .rtf format from a university archive to print on my Mac, and being linguistics papers, these are usually full of all sorts of weird phonetic characters as well as assorted Greek characters. Those papers created orginally on Macs tend to come across beautifully, but some of the ones created on PCs, and especially those created in WordPerfect, show up with blanks or nothing or garbage in place of some of the phonetic and Greek characters, making it an even greater challenge to read and understand these papers, so the .rtf format may not be as foolproof as it appears. I don't know if the problem lies with basic font incompatibility or failure to embed the unusual fonts in the .rtf file or something else, but my experience would lead me to be cautious about cross-platform file exchanges, especially when non-standard characters are involved. I would certainly send a few test files just to be on the safe side. Liz Farr Aspiring indexer and non-aspiring linguist Los Lunas, New Mexico On Mon, 18 Nov 1996, Sarah Lee Bihlmayer wrote: > > I can definitively tell you that RTF files work seamlessly across platforms. > I have numerous clients with whom I do this exact type of file transfer--I > work on both platforms and use the same files on both my computers this way > with no translation errors whatsoever. I've not tried it with customers who > use WordPerfect, but I suspect it would be no problem--I do know it works > like a dream with Word. RTF is a Microsoft proprietary format, and it has > become a standard because it's also the coding language for Windows online > help. Its reliability as a standard may change soon, however--because MS > plans to switch to HTML as the coding language for its help systems with the > release of Win97. But for now, this method definitely works! > > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 23:31:13 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jillbarret@AOL.COM Subject: water cooler chat - indexing parents I loved this thread! It is so great to hear from others who are balancing the demands of parenting and indexing. I, too, parent by day (2 kids- 5 yrs and 7 mo's) then "go to the office" after the kids are off to dreamland. Both jobs are great! Lynn, I can *relate*! My husband and I also roam the house all night and share office space. (Just last night I told him he is the best office-buddy I ever had! :-) ) Thanks to all of you who shared a little of your personal work day. (I wonder how many others there are out there?) Somehow it seems a little easier knowing that others are making it work! Jill Barrett Indexing Services Newport News, VA ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 07:55:50 CET Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Anna Lhotska Organization: Parlament CR, Poslanecka snemovna Subject: Thesaurus software? Hello everyone, my library tries to find a suitable management software for our multilingual thesaurus. Up to now I have known about the MTM, Multites and TAT. Could you give me any other tips, please? Anna Lhotska Czech PArliamentary Library Please, send your answers to my personal address lhotska@psp.cz Anna Lhotska project EUROVOC ------------------------------------------------------------------ Parliamentary Library Parliament of the Czech Republic Phone: (+42)(2)57175218 Snemovni 4 Fax: (+42)(2) 53 94 06 CZ-118 26 Praha 1 E-mail: lhotska@psp.cz ****************************************************************** Visit our Eurovoc Thesaurus Project Web site! http://www.psp.cz/eurovoc/ ****************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 10:24:34 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group Comments: Warning -- original Sender: tag was maryann@ELMO.REVISOR.LEG.STATE.MN.US From: Maryann Corbett Organization: Revisor of Statutes Subject: Twin Cities Chapter, December meeting The Twin Cities Chapter of the American Society of Indexers meet on December 7, a Saturday, from 3 to 5 p.m. at Caffe Con Amore (917 Grand Avenue, in the Milton Mall). Come early and do some Christmas shopping on Grand Avenue, then sit down with us and enjoy your favorite kind of espresso, while we talk about how to look like a pro without spending a fortune. Lynn Hannauer, a graphic arts consultant, will be there to answer your questions about putting together your own publicity materials. She'll be there during the first hour of the meeting. Come ready to ask everything you always wanted to know about logos, typefaces, letterheads, card and paper stock, and more. The second hour will be a business meeting to discuss the purchase of PEN's mailing list, the upcoming seminar in March, and the coming elections. Cost of the meeting is $5 at the door; coffee is extra. Space is limited, so please call or e-mail Maryann Corbett to let her know you're coming (612-297-2952 wk or 612-645-5985 home). -- Maryann Corbett Language Specialist Office of the Revisor of Statutes Minnesota Legislature 612-297-2952 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 19:53:02 -0800 Reply-To: greenhou@erols.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "S. Greenhouse" Subject: Traffic (lack thereof) Where, oh where have all the indexers gone? In fall, when the starlings stick around; the gardening chores go underground. Do books with unmapped information abound? Where are all the wisdom nuggets? Are we all outside with rakes and buckets? Are all our fingers cold and sluggish? Have we drained the virtual water cooler? Are computers co-opted by preschoolers? I'm not trying to be a fool(er), but where, oh where have the indexers gone? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 11:17:23 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Michael Brackney Subject: Re: dialog boxes At 09:52 AM 11/18/96 -0500, Lynn wrote Fred: >... BTW, I don't know how far you are into this index but, being that a lot >of software has a huge number of dialog boxes, you may find yourself with an >enormous subentry list by classifying each dialog box under a dialog box main >heading. Then again, it may work quite nicely in this particular index... Lynn: I want to question the need for doubleposting dialog boxes under a dialog box main heading. [Mid-message note: en dashes are represented by single, unpaired underscores instead of double hyphens to avoid confusion with em dashes. ;-D ] When I index software manuals I focus primarily on writing task-oriented entries since I think that they are the ones that users go to most frequently out of their need to find out how to _do_ something. Of course I include many program feature_oriented entries as well, mostly I think for the more experienced users who know enough about the program (or programs in general) to know what to look for--as well as for browsers--and especially of course when the manuals are program feature_oriented. Many of these entries are quite narrow, like obscure little options with sometimes oddly phrased names that very few users are likely to look up, and sometimes I find myself regretting the time it takes me to enter them, but when they're actually discussed however briefly they're what I call "obligatory" and have to be included. I also do a great deal of doubleposting, but I don't like making already sizable indexes unnecessarily unwieldy with marginal program feature_oriented doubleposts--for reasons of space and out of consideration for users, and also out of consideration for myself! (I do not exist merely in order to write index entries!) So I want to question the usefulness of doubleposting dialog boxes under a dialog box main heading. Who needs 'em?! Cheers, Michael Brackney Indexing Service 134 Kathleen Way Grass Valley, CA 95945 916-272-7088 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 11:17:27 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Michael Brackney Subject: Re: Water Cooler Chat: Long night Dear Lynn: Your last water-cooler chat grew on me as I recognized the growth--or should I say decline?--of my own patterns over the past busy months. At least, I thought, I don't have a TV going (I don't have one at all), and I don't drink coffee...but when I got to the part about the "only major problem" being "I have a hard time telling what day of the week it is..." I came face to face with the mirror. Life on-screen. Even with the sunrise every morning, you say. Then your next observation did me in: "... but then the computer will tell me what day it is in an instant whenever I want to know"! I gave out with a guffaw. To paraphrase the Heart Sutra and turn it all around, "Gone, gone, gone beyond--gone, hopeless, pathetic"! And then to think you woke up your poor sleep-deprived husband when you feared he'd blown the vetting...aye, hopeless indeed. Is there nothing more?! Drink up, Michael ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 10:53:42 +1100 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Don Gould Subject: Web Indexing Anyone out there working with indexing of HTML/WEB documents? I am scratching around trying to find out what's happening in that realm. I have access to only limited library resources, our bookstore is a more like a book stall, and due to high phone rates to my service provider my Internet surfing is limited to quick dips. Any suggestions on sources of information would be appreciated. Please respond to my e-mail address. Many thanks, Don Gould Emerald, Queensland Australia email: gould@enternet.com.au