From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 11-MAY-1996 20:09:17.40 To: CIRJA02 CC: Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9604D" Date: Sat, 11 May 1996 19:47:39 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9604D" To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:02:04 ECT Reply-To: EBENNETT@SHRSYS.HSLC.ORG Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elizabeth Bennett Subject: Ergonomic Keyboards ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I have used a Kinesis keyboard for nearly three years. In fact, I have two -- one at home, and one at work. I am very happy with them, and believe that they have significantly increased the amount of typing I can do. They may also have prevented my chronic tendonitis from developing into carpal tunnel syndrome, but that's an argument from the negative. Kinesis has also been a pleasure to deal with. The one time I had serious trouble, they didn't argue, just shipped a new keyboard while I shipped back the old one. They offer a 30-day trial, which is about long enough to find out if their keyboard works for you (the first two weeks you will do nothing but curse, because the cursor keys and some of the control keys are in different places. It is not easy to overcome 15 years of typing habits.) The Kinesis keyboard is also programmable; I don't know if the Microsoft board has that feature. I haven't swapped around many keys, but a left-handed friend swapped the spacebar and the backspace, to get the spacebar under her dominant thumb. It comes with a footpedal, but I've never used it. Elizabeth Z. Bennett, Ph.D. Senior Editor, Database and Nomenclature Systems Group ECRI 5200 Butler Pike Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462 (610) 825-6000 ext. 373 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:02:18 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@aol.com Subject: Re: Analysis run amok? ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Kevin, I think your response to Lynn is excellent, and contains some excellent points. The concept of inclusiveness is an interesting one, as is the subject of hierarchy. This is particularly to the point in scientific indexing, which is mostly what I do. So your example of listing a chemical name and expecting to list every reaction below it as a subhead is a good one. No can do! Impossible, within the constraints of time and good business sense. Sometimes I think it is the roadmap that is most important in an index. It is important to index all indexable material, but how does one index every bit and piece and morsel of information? We all wrestle with that in every index we create. Thanks for adding some interesting points to this discussion. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:02:39 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Karl E. Vogel" Organization: Control Data Systems Inc. Subject: Re: permuted keyword in context ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >> On Thu, 18 Apr 1996 15:22:55 ECT, >> Robin Hilp said: R> Do readers generally find [a permuted keyword in context index] more R> useful than the standard multi-level index? Yes, very much so. I bought a source-code CD recently (BSD 4.4-Lite, if you're interested) which came with this type of index in a small book. I paid more for the book+CD than I would have for the CD alone, and it was definitely worth it. Of course, if it gets too big you need a thesaurus to find your way around the index... -- Karl Vogel vogelke@c17mis.wpafb.af.mil Control Data Systems, Inc. ASC/YCOA, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:02:53 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: MaryMort@aol.com Subject: See also, meaning of ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Kevin Mulrooney asked: > how do >index users really perceive a "see also"? Good question. I agree that See also usually has the appearance of pointing to some tangentially related information. However, this can be very useful. When I'm using an index someone else has written, when I don't find the specific term I'm looking for, I try related terms, and then use any See alsos as you would in an encyclopedia (or as you would the links in a Web page), to find information that is more pertinent to my search. On the other hand, when I'm writing an index and it has a length limit, I often use See also when I would like to double-post. For example, I just completed an index where space was severely limited, and included the following entries: Nixon, Richard M. ... (a number of subentries) See also Watergate Watergate ... (a number of subentries) Nixon's responsibility for My assumption (or hope?) is that index users *will* follow the links I set up, if they don't find what they want under the first term they check. Mary -- * Mary Mortensen * marymort@aol.com * 2100 Heatherwood Dr. #G4 * 913-841-3631 * Lawrence, KS 66047 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:03:06 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Barbara S. Littlewood" <75223.1545@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Analysis run amok? ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On April 16 Lynn Moncrief wrote: >I'm indexing a fascinating chapter in a book on cytology about cnidarian >nervous systems. (Yeah, I didn't know either that the nervous systems of >jellyfish, etc. could be so interesting--or that they even had them. ;-D) >Anyway, I derived the following set of headings: > >Biosynthesis > of cnidarian neuropeptides > Antho-RFamide > in sea anemones, 58 -64 > in sea pansies, 64-67 > AnthoRPamide I in sea anemones, 68-69 > Antho-RPamides II-IV in sea anemones, 69-71 > higher animals versus, 57-58 > in Hydrozoans, 74-77 > metamorphosis-inducing in sea anemones, 71-74 > >Note that the there are subsubsubentries under subsubentry "Antho-RF amide". "Biosynthesis" seems like too general a heading for an advanced cytology book. Why not avoid the whole thing by using "Biosynthesis. See specific neuropeptides"? Barb Littlewood ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:03:16 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: KIRABOO@aol.com Subject: Re: Ergonomic Keyboards and Key Layouts ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I have not had personal experience with an ergonomic keyboard, but an officemate of mine has. She had tendinitis, and her doctor suggested an ergonomic keyboard, so she got one of those that's kind of humped-up in the middle, and angled a bit as well (made by Microsoft, if I recall correctly). She said at first it was awkward, but she got used to it very quickly, and liked it a lot. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:03:25 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Prindex@aol.com Subject: synonyms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Thanks for all of your thoughts about the synonym question. If term x took only 1 line I doubleposted with term y and next to y I put x in parenthesis, so that when the reader is taken to a page where the term doesn't appear he will know what to look for. If term x took more than 1 line I listed term y See X. Judy Press Press Indexing Services ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:03:34 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lori Lathrop <76620.456@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Analysis ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- In response to Lynn Moncrief, who asked if I would say *never* go to four (or more) levels .... I would never say *never* go to 4 levels in an index; however, I'd prefer to avoid it, if possible, because, while it may provide a hierarchical structure that readers find useful, it may also jeopardize retrievability because it "hides" some really useful info in the murky depths of those sub-sub and sub-sub-sub entries (unless the index also contains double-posted entries and/or cross-references). Also, going to 4 or more levels introduces a level of complexity that requires much more analysis and "maintenance" (keeping track of all those levels and keeping the hierarchy consistent) as you develop the index. On the other hand, it can also be difficult to be restricted to just two (or, possibly, even three???) levels of entries because the wording of the entries must be as concise as possible. In the end, all we can do is follow our best judgment and hope we've provided a useful structure and enough access points that our internal analysis is invisible to readers. Now ... after reading this windy dissertation, aren't you sorry you asked? :-) TTFN .... Lori ***************************************************************** Lori Lathrop ---------->INTERNET:76620.456@compuserve.com Lathrop Media Services, P.O. Box 3065, Idaho Springs, CO 80452 Office: 303-567-4447, ext. 28 / Fax: 303-567-9306 ***************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:03:44 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@aol.com Subject: Re: Analysis run amok? ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- In a message dated 96-04-18 15:35:21 EDT, indexer@iNet.net (Kevin Mulrooney) writes: > >Your set of terms looks like a beautiful layout for a thesaurus, with >gorgeous well-posed hierarchical relationships. But is that what an index >is about? [no in my opinion] > >What are you hoping to accomplish: sort of a "one-stop shopping" term with >everything you ever wanted to know about biosynthesis? If that's the case, >and assuming every single sub exists as an appropriate main heading, and >that space is not an issue, and that indexer time is not an issue, then >knock yourself out! Not, quite a one-stop shopping term, Kevin. Only substantive references to the subject are listed there. The subs do all exist as main headings and space isn't an issue. Actually, my purpose with this (or any other entry) is not to provide readers with everything they want to know about biosynthesis, but to provide them with an entry point with every substantive discussion in the text on the issue--which I think is indeed the point of an index. I had edited the following bit of reasoning out of one of my earlier posts on the subject, which ended up being huge anyway. But the "biosynthesis" entry was for those readers who tend to think in terms of processes (as I often do) rather than the object or substance involved in the process, accessing the "process-oriented" entry in the index. By that, I mean that when using a software manual, for example, I'm very likely to look in the index for an entry describing "what" I am trying to do, expecting to find the "object" that I'm trying to manipulate in the subentry list. At the same time, I would expect to find the object that I'm trying to manipulate as it's own main heading with a subentry for the process I'm interested in. As an index *user* I access information both ways and therefore carry my own index usage habits over into the indexes I create. (Maybe I'm mistaken in my belief that there are many people out there that access information both ways.) Now, scientific works aren't software manuals, but there are processes involved nevertheless. (BTW, I hope I read between the lines right about why you objected to "biosynthesis" as an entry. :-D) > >I must say however that I don't think it's the indexer's task to organize >the information in such a way and that the advantages are questionable given >what we know about how clueless most index users are about using indexes. I >wouldn't do this any more than in a book on chemistry have a term >"reactions" followed by 300 subs with every reaction mentioned in the book. Like you, I don't create a term "reactions" in chemistry texts for exactly that reason. Most of them are passing references. But I do create entries for specific reactions that are discussed in depth, especially when authors devote entire sections to them. This is to account for the chemist who says, "I remember reading about XXX-YYY reactions in synthesizing ....." and plops into the index looking for an entry for a XXX-YYY reaction first instead of an entry for the compound being synthesized (where the concept of XXX-YYY reaction may not be even visible because it's been subsumed into a page range for a "synthesis" subentry). I think it is indeed the task of the indexer to provide the variety of access points needed to get the index user where they want to go with a minimum of false drops. And, if biosynthesis will get someone where they want to go because that's where they looked first, why shouldn't I give them that? Why should I force them to go only where I think they should go in the index? Sure, when space is tight or subentry levels are extremely limited, then the "process-oriented entries" and the deeper levels of analysis go out the window. But, I don't think we can or should prejudge from what angle a reader will try to access a given passage in the text. Of course, there are limits to this, but I'm speaking on general principle. Actually, there's really no comparison here between using "biosynthesis" in this particular book and "reactions" in a chemistry book. Chemistry is pretty much nothing but reactions of one sort or another, but cytology encompasses far more than biosynthesis. > >A specific reason: how about what I call the "fallacy of inclusiveness". Are >you positive that every single solitary reference concerning biosynthesis is >among your subs? (Actually Lynn you probably are but most people wouldn't >be!) Because IMHO the **instant** you place specific terms in such a >detailed hierarchical fashion you have implied that **all** such specific >references to the topic will be listed here, which may not be true (thus the >"fallacy" part). A reader who learns that there's a place in the index >"biosynthesis" with a collection of all available information on >biosynthesis would learn to only look here instead of looking up topics >straight up. [see also "Law of Unintended Consequences"] I like your reference to the Law of Unintended Consequences, BTW. ;-D But that is not the implication of placing specific terms in such a detailed hierarchical fashion. The implication is that the subentries listed here are pointers to all of the *substantive* discussions on the topic. And, that's the implication throughout any index, IMHO. Plus, indexes *are* structured hierarchies of information, otherwise they wouldn't be indexes but simple lists of keywords. Isn't an index is an *organized* map of information, and aren't concepts indeed essentially hierarchical (unless I've been doing too many object-oriented programming books)? As for readers "learning" to look in a certain place in the index, why not? As long as it is logical for the information to be there, we've just saved the reader time and possibly frustration. Those readers who look up topics straight up, as you say, will also get to where they're going because the information is double-posted. In fact, they're going to find it under "neuropeptides" and under entries for those specific neuropeptides where it's gone on about for pages. It just happened to be that I was working on the "biosynthesis" permutation of it and hit a fourth level when I got that urge to post this question to the list, neglecting to mention that it was double-posted. I think we also need to take into account that there are various groups of index users who use indexes differently. There is that important group of bookstore browsers and acquisitions librarians who scan the index to see what topics are covered. IMHO, double-posting enables them to get a handle on the varying angles from which the concepts in the text are covered, keeping in mind that these folks are *not* familiar with the index and text. Also consider those readers who have a special interest in specific processes per se. Do we neglect their needs by only burying the information elsewhere in the index where it may not even be explicitly mentioned? And we *do* have to account for those "clueless" users you referred to. If their retrieval techniques are so unpredictable, then their needs are better served by providing a wider range of entry points vs. a narrower range of them. My goal in writing an index is to get as many of these different types of folks to where they need to go with a minimum of effort on their part (which requires more on my part), not presume to teach or force them into a single pattern of retrieval techniques. I also happen to think of the index as an organic adjunct to the author's work. If the author explicitly stresses a process, such as biosynthesis, by titling a section "Biosynthesis of...", then I feel that the process-oriented portion of the concept should get a heading as well as the object-oriented portion. And I've had a few books that have devoted sections specifically to "biosynthesis" of given substances. (This work happens to be multi-authored and other authors in this same book also explicitly devoted sections to "biosynthesis" of their particular compounds of interest.) I hope this clarifies my reasoning somewhat, Kevin. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:03:54 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@aol.com Subject: Re: Analysis run amok? ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- In a message dated 96-04-17 17:54:26 EDT, you write: > Fourthly, if the authors >>thought it was important enough to differentiate between sea anemones and >sea >>pansies in cnidarian neuropeptide biosynthesis, I feel compelled to do the >>same in the index. > >I'm not sure I buy that . . . completely. I see authors do lots of things >(including organization of material) I think will not make for a very good >index structure. I hardly ever go down to a third level, let alone a fourth >level, but I imagine it would be OK so long this is not the only way for >users to find those sea anemones and sea pansies. Do they also appear as >main entries? Carol, I agree and I should have qualified what I said about authors' organization of material. I should have added "when the organization is logical" (as it is in this book). Often I abandon the author's organization of a book because it is illogical, nor does it work in the index structure. And yes, sea anenomes and sea pansies are main entries. I'm sorry I didn't mention that the "biosynthesis" heading was not the only access point for this info in the index. (See also my response to Kevin.) I hadn't seriously considered creating separate main headings for "Biosynthesis of X" and "Biosynthesis of Y" as you recommended to move the subentries up a level. I guess it's because I prefer a more hierarchical ordering of concepts when the higher level concept is the same and they'd fall adjacent to each other in the index. I tend to ask "Why did they do that?" when I see that in an index because it departs from the conceptual hierarchy and therefore, IMHO, must be an artificial device to meet publisher's limitations on subentry levels. (I tend to do the same thing when encountering similar situations in how text is organized, only more colorfully, because it causes me to flip back and forth to determine why this passage is not *under* what I expected it to be.) So, I do this only when I don't have a choice. This may be an overemphasis on weaving precise, analytical structures on my part, i.e., if X and Y go under Z conceptually, then by golly they go there, not as Z+X and Z+Y. (Not to be confused with double-posting Z under X and Y, which I think is necessary.) I need to reconsider that. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:04:13 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DStaub11@aol.com Subject: Re: Analysis run amok? ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Lynn wrote: >. I'm sure that >most people don't work this way, but I'm mentally generating entries and >typing them in a flaming white heat as I read each group of paragraphs, >scrolling through the index itself constantly while I go. If a fourth level >entry immediately pops to mind, it's far easier for me to plug it in than >ignore it and wonder at the end what to do with so many unanalyzed higher >level locators for it. What I find extremely more difficult is to have to >index more lightly than the text demands or restricting myself in any way. I >can't get all of those subtle informational threads and patterns (that seem >to be in all texts, regardless of how well or poorly organized) right if I >don't have them there in the developing index to work from. I end up going >back through the pages because something is nagging at me that I realize I >should have indexed earlier. Or an agonizing structural flaw develops. Even >when there aren't space or structural limitations, I often delete entries on >the fly and in the final editing process. But this is far easier to do when I >have a structure to delete from than not having enough in the index to know >whether a particular entry is too important to delete or where it should be >spun off as a main heading. This is exactly the way I work! I index social sciences and humanities books, and very very rarely go to more than one level of subentry (usually it isn't allowed anyway). I find it works better to break out subheads that are getting too big and create main headings, with liberal cross references. In textbooks I'm more likely to double-post (under the subhead and the main heading) than in scholarly books, where the content is usually all in a tangle anyway! (See my article in forthcoming Entry Points.) (Pardon the horn-tooting, but it's my first one and I'm proud!) But in any case, I always make myself put in as much detail as possible as I go--as Lynn said, it's much easier to delete than to go back and search something out or find subheadings for a long string of page references! The worst is when I find I've conflated two concepts that ought to be separate (or change my mind about how to separate them) and have to re-index whole sections of the main topic....I love this talk about content analysis! Thanks, everybody! Do Mi ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:05:26 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: BethJT@aol.com Subject: HyperIndex for the Macintosh ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Anyone out familiar with HyperIndex for the Mac? I am just learning to use it but am having a lot of difficulties with the documentation. Horrors--there is no index for the manual and it command oriented rather than organized by function. It leaves out things that seem really obvious. For example, I can't figure out how to go back over my entries on card 1. There is a button to go back to your last entry but that's all. Is there any way to go back to the beginning to check and correct entries? Also, I've noticed some errors in alphabetization in the subentries. When I ask for letter-by-letter I still get before . Am I missing a step in the formating process? Help! Beth in Houston ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 10:05:43 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: IndexerJ@aol.com Subject: ASI Ground Transportation from Denver Airport ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- For air travelers to the American Soc. of Indexers convention in Denver. Express Limousine is offering a discounted rate for those attending the American Society of Indexers meeting in Denver, Colorado, May 16-18, 1996. This company will provide van transportation from Denver International Airport to the Executive Tower Inn for a discounted rate of $20 round trip; the usual rate is $27 round trip. The one-way fare of $15 will not be discounted. The $27 round-trip rate is the same for all the various shuttle/limo/van companies as far as I could ascertain. The Express Limo counter at the airport is located on Level 5 (baggage claim level) near the Alamo Rental Car counter. Because this is a limousine company, not strictly a van service, the vehicles pick up passengers on the first island in the roadway outside. The signs all indicate limousine pickup, and you will probably see a limousine or two to guide you. Vans depart every 30 minutes. Express Limousine vans are white with blue and red markings. The 10-passenger limo-vans are clean and comfortable. The drivers all seem to be friendly and courteous and offer complimentary coffee or tea. The vans even have small TVs, but I did not see one in operation. If you have further questions, please send an e-mail message to jcmoody@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 16:05:00 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: ROBJRICH@aol.com Subject: Re: See also, meaning of ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- OK, y'all - I hesitate to respond to this question, because writing to Index-L often is like tossing a twig into a tree full of roosting starlings. In an instant, the whole flock leaps into the air and the fluttering and twittering is something to behold. Using xrefs to avoid double-posting in space-limited indexes is a fine idea. This is how I deal with "See", "See also" and "See under" xrefs: 1. "See" cross-references are not tangential. They are direct. They simply say: "If you want to find references to this topic, this is not the term used in this index so you won't find them here. Instead, go "See" So-and_So." For example: - Diamondbacks. See Rattlesnakes, diamondback 2. "See also" cross-references are tangential. They say: "The information you want is here, but there also is related information elsewhere, so in addition to this "See Also" So-and-So." For example: - Rattlesnakes, diamondback. See also Snakebite, incidents of 3. I use "See under" cross-references when the topic being cross-referenced appears as a specific subheading under a different main heading, rather than just appearing in a list of otherwise undifferentiated subentries. For example: - Rattlesnakes. See under Pit vipers - Pit vipers copperheads copperhead sub1 copperhead sub2 etc. rattlesnakes, diamondback diamondback sub1 diamondback sub2 etc. - The difference, in my usage, between plain-vanilla "See" and "See under" xrefs is that the "See" xref tells the reader that the term sought is not used in the index, and to use the referenced term, while the "See under" xref tells the reader that the term sought is a proper one and is used, but it appears under a different main heading. Despite the importunings of the Orthodoxists, using this approach or vilifying it will have negligible effect upon the rotation of the Earth or the forward/backward march of history. A study presented in the ASI meeting in D.C. pointed out that most college-level readers haven't the foggiest notion of how to use an index anyway, and all our exquisite refinement and Old-World craftsmanship might be more a case of our preaching, not to the choir, but to an empty church. - But one of the truly wonderful things about freelance indexing is that we can go ahead and do it as we see it, answering more to our own consciences, aesthetics and sense of professional responsibility than is possible (I suspect) for the majority of 9-to-5ers. - Bob Richardson ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 16:05:11 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Richard Hill Subject: ASIS Mid Year Conference Update ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- ASIS Mid Year Meeting ---- Major, Late Breaking Program Additions ---- Plenary Sessions Added: Monday, May 20, 3:00pm - 4:15pm The Impact of Technology on Education. William T. Snyder, Chancellor, University of Tennessee, Knoxville Tuesday, 10:30am - 12:15pm JAVASoft Bob Bressler, Sun Microsystems Laboratories Wednesday, 10:45am - 12:15pm Technology and Entertainment Chris Landreth, Alias|Wavefront, a Silicon Graphics Company. For the complete schedule with other revisions and additions, please visit the ASIS Web site at regularly. * * * CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT * * * The Digital Revolution: Assessing the Impact on Business, Education, and Social Structures ASIS 1996 Mid Year Conference May 18 - 22, San Diego, CA [Session outline follows. Accurate as of 4/16/96. For complete, frequently updated program information, point your WWW browser to http://www.asis.org and follow the links to Meetings, 1996 Mid Year Meeting. Or contact asis@cni.org and we will mail or e-mail the complete copy of this program.] Highlights Include - Keynote by Sherry Turkle, MIT Media Labs Dr. Turkle's most recent research is on the psychology of computer-mediated communication which is reported in her latest book, _ Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet_. Among her other writings are: "Project Athena at MIT" and "Growing up in an Age of Intelligent Machines: Reconstruction of the Psychological and Reconsiderations of the Human." -Plenary by William T. Snyder, Chancellor, University of Tennessee, Knoxville. The Impact of Technology on Education Dr. William T. Snyder is Chancellor and professor of engineering science and mechanics at The University of Tennessee, Knoxville. He received the B.S. degree in mechanical engineering from UT, Knoxville and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in mechanical engineering from Northwestern University. - Plenary by Bob Bressler, Sun Microsystems Labs. JAVA - Plenary by Chris Landreth, Alias|Wavefront, a Silicon Graphics Company Technology and Entertainment PRE-CONFERENCE SEMINARS Saturday, May 18 Professional Development (9:00am - 5:00pm except where noted) * JAVA Programming (1:00pm - 5:00pm) * Copyright and Intellectual Property in an Electronic World * Practical HTML: A Hands-on Workshop Sunday, May 19 * Building a Quality Presence on the Net * Advanced HTML Workshop -- COURSE FULL - WAITING LIST ONLY * Managing Web Servers * Boolean to Free-Text Searching * Lotus Notes for Information Management TECHNICAL PROGRAM - SESSION TOPICS Monday, May 20 * Plenary Session: Sherry Turkle, MIT Media Lab * Plenary Session: William T. Snyder, University of Tennessee * Information Policies and Principles * Digital Libraries: Tools, Usage and Models * Electronic Scientific Publications: Role of the Gatekeepers * Changes in Business Directions: Impact of the Web * Access to and Control of Digital Resources * Challenges to Traditional Libraries * Assessing Impact in Business * Digital Library Trends and Issues: An NSF Perspective * Context and Politics among the Players in the Digital Community * The CommuniStation Project at Rutgers: An Exploration of Democracy in Learning * National Information Policy Caught in the Digital Revolution * Finding Information on the Net Tuesday, May 21 * Plenary Session: Bob Bressler, Sun Microsystems Laboratories * Retrieval/Feedback Approaches in Digital Libraries * Internal Web Pages: How Corporate and Academic Research Environments are Managing Information Access and Flow Internally Using World Wide Web Technology * Health Care Information Technology: Changing the Way Society Seeks Health Care. * Legacy Data: Conversion & Retention * Role of the Science and Technology Information Professional in Meeting the Needs of Scientists in the Digital Environment * SGML Authoring Tools * Evolving Information Economics: Responses to the Digital Revolution * Models and Measurement in Digital Libraries * Electronic Journals, Archives, and ILL: Information Transfer * Network Instruction, Distant-Learning & Information Seeking Behavior * The Digital Revolution in Education: Approaches to Evaluation. * Planning GII: Implications for Training Wednesday, May 22 * Plenary Session: Chris Landreth, Animator, Alias|Wavefront, a Silicon Graphics company * Network-centered Computing: Web-based Interfaces for Organizational Databases * Museum Education Site Licensing Project: Networked Delivery of High Quality Images and Accompanying Text * The Implications of Digital Curricula * The Role of Electronic Media in Science Education TOURS AND SOCIAL EVENTS (SEPARATE FEE REQUIRED) Saturday, May 18, 1996 * Behind the Scenes at the San Diego Zoo (9:30am - 2:30pm) * Tijuana, Mexico (9:00am - 2:00pm) Sunday, May 19, 1996 * San Diego Wild Animal Park (10:00am - 3:00pm) Monday, May 20, 1996 * San Diego Harbor Dinner Cruise on the Lord Hornblower (6:00pm - 10:00pm) Tuesday, May 21, 1996 * San Diego State Univ. Electronic Book Reserve Room (12:30pm - 3:00pm) Wednesday May 22, 1996 * San Diego Super Computer Center (12:30pm - 3:00pm) CONFERENCE HEADQUARTERS/HOTEL -- Marriott Mission Valley The San Diego Marriott Mission Valley offers a fully equipped health club with exercise equipment, whirlpool, sauna, two tennis courts, and, of course, a swimming pool enlivened by a waterfall. The hotel is 10 minutes from San Diego International airport and has ample free parking. Rates: $79.00 single or double When making hotel reservations, be certain to mention that you are attending the ASIS Mid-Year Conference. Make hotel reservations directly with the Marriott (not with Marriott national): by calling 1 (800) 842-5329 by faxing (619) 297-3960 or by mail to : San Diego Marriott Mission Valley 8757 Rio San Diego Drive San Diego, CA 92109. NOTE: We have passed the hotel deadline for reservations and the ROOM BLOCK at San Diego Marriott Mission Valley is full. A waiting list has been established and alternative housing is available through the Marriott Mission Valley. You must use the numbers above, not national Marriott numbers, to get advantageous rates. TRAVEL TO AND IN SAN DIEGO -- Get there for less! For lowest available fares on any airline, call Conventions in America, the official travel agency for ASIS. You will receive $100,000 free flight insurance and become eligible to win free travel in their bi-monthly drawings. Ask for Group #425 1-800-929-4242(24 hour toll free message center). Outside 800 call (619)678-3600/Fax(619) 678-3699 Internet: FLYCIA@balboa.com. Hours: M-F 6:30am - 5:00pm Pacific Standard Time Or Call American at 1-800-433-1790, ask for Starfile #S6456AB. Call USAir 1-800-334-8644, ask for Goldfile #26390172. Alamo Rent A Car is also offering special rates starting as low as $25/day or $125/week. Unlimited free mileage and bonus frequent flyer miles on American Airlines and US Air. Alamo 1-800-732-3232, ID #432368, GR. ASIS members can also get their ASIS-member discount from Alamo by calling 1 (800) 354- 2322, asking for Rate Code BY and giving the Association I.D., #421944. CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS The cost of Conference proceedings is NOT built into the registration fee in order to make the conference as affordable as possible. Individuals wishing to purchase proceedings on site may do so for $15.00. HOW TO REGISTER By Mail: Complete one copy of the following registration form for each registrant. Please be sure you provide all information requested on the form. Send your completed form(s) to ASIS Conference Registrar, Department 5189, Washington, D.C. 20061- 5189. We will mail written confirmations of registrations received up to May 10, 1996. By Fax: Send your completed form to (301) 495-0810. Fax registration must include MasterCard, VISA, or American Express payment. By Phone or Email: Phone your complete information to (301) 495-0900. Phone registrations must include MasterCard, VISA or American Express. Email all registration information with credit card information to asis@cni.org. For more information call (301) 495-0900, 9:00am - 5:00pm EST. Early Registration Discounts: To qualify for registration discounts, your registration and payment information must be received by ASIS by April 12, 1996. Late rates apply to registrations received after this date. This deadline will be strictly adhered to. Cancellations and Refunds: Cancellations and Refund requests will be honored only if received _in writing_ by April 19, 1996. No cancellation or refund requests will be accepted after this date. All refunds will be subject to a $25 processing fee. Refund checks will be issued six to eight weeks after the conference. Special event fees are non-refundable. REGISTRATION FEES Early rates available if registration RECEIVED AT ASIS by April 12, 1996. After then late prices will apply. Conference Proceedings are not included in the registration fee. ASIS 1996 Mid Year MEETING May 18-22, 1996 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION FORM ***************************************************************** Are you an ASIS member? ___ Yes ___ No ASIS Mbr#:___________ ___Mr. ___Ms. Last Name:______________________First Name:______________________ Nick Name for Badge: _______________________________ Title:________________________________________________________ Organization:_________________________________________________ Address:______________________________________________________ City:_______________________________ State/Province:__________ Zip plus 4/Postal Code:_____________Country:__________________ Phone:________________________ Fax:__________________________ E-mail:__________________________________________ Special Needs:________________________________________________ (wheelchair access, etc) Is this your first ASIS conference? ______ FORM OF PAYMENT **************** ____ VISA _____ MasterCard ____ American Express Name on Card:______________________________________________ Card Number:_______________________________________________ Expires: ______________ EVENT REGISTRATION ********************** Check the appropriate items and enter the corresponding fees. Early rates available if registration RECEIVED AT ASIS by April 12, 1996. After then regular prices will apply. Select a Registration Category: _____ Regular _____ Retired (ASIS membership category only) _____ Student FULL CONFERENCE Full Conference Fee:_______ Regular Retired Student Members: $210 $105 $70 Regular Student Non-members: $320 $95 SINGLE DAY RATES: Single Day Fee:_______ Regular Retired Student Members: $115 $70 N/A Regular Student Non-members: $165 N/A Select Day(s): ___MON ___TUES ___WEDS ___THURS SPECIAL EVENTS ***************** PRE-CONFERENCE SEMINARS/CONTINUING EDUCATION ************************************************************** Copyright and Intellect Prop in an E-World (Sat, 5/18) Seminar Fee:_______ Members $245 Non-members $270 Java Programming (Sat, 5/18, 1/2 day) Seminar Fee:_______ Members $180 Non-members $205 Practical HTML: Hands-on Workshop (Sat 5/18) Seminar Fee:_______ Members $260 Non-members $285 From Boolean to Free Text(Sun, 5/18) Seminar Fee:_______ Members $225 Non-members $255 Developing A Quality Net Presence (Sun, 5/19) Seminar Fee:_______ Members $245 Non-members $270 Tech based IM using Lotus Notes (Sun, 5/19) Seminar Fee:_______ Members $225 Non-members $255 Managing Web Servers (Sun, 5/19)(SIG MGT) Seminar Fee:_______ Members $225 Non-members $255 [Members of SIG MGT, deduct $10) Advanced HTML Workshop (Sun, 5/19) Seminar Fee:_______ Members $275 Non-members $300 Course is FULL - Waiting List Only! TOURS (early/late) **************** Behind the Scene at the San Diego Zoo (Sat 5/18) Tour Fee:_______ Members $50 Non-members $55 Tijuana, MX (Sat 5/18) Tour Fee:_______ Members $50 Non-members $55 San Diego Wild Animal Park (Sun 5/19) Tour Fee:_______ Members $50 Non-members $55 San Diego State U Elect. Book Reserve(Tue, 5/21) Tour Fee:_______ Members $30 Non-members $35 Harbor Dinner Cruise (Mon 5/20) Tour Fee:_______ Members: $70 Non-members: $75 OTHER ******* _____ ASIS MEMBERSHIP $95 (1 year) Membership Fee:_______ MY96-N TOTAL FEES: $____________ Richard Hill Executive Director, American Society for Information Science 8720 Georgia Avenue, Suite 501 Silver Spring, MD 20910 FAX: (301) 495-0810 Voice: (301) 495-0900 rhill@cni.org http://www.asis.org ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 16:05:24 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carolyn Weaver Subject: Re: synonyms In-Reply-To: <9604181313.AA29871@mx4.u.washington.edu> ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- IMHO, indexing a multi-authored work is like indexing a journal: you create a thesaurus (informal) for that publication, index to the most term most commonly used by that work's authors for a single concept, and use cross references for the synonyms. The object of the index is to help the USERS find everything in the book on the subject - not to cater to authors' idiosyncratic vocabularies. I have copies of standard thesauri for health sciences, psychology, business, etc., and rely on those for terms when the authors in a multi-authored work don't speak the same language. I will discuss synonyms with the author or editor for a single-authored work; but for multi-authored works I feel it's my obligation as the indexer to provide structure/guidance for the user rather than letting synonyms for the same term scatter all over the alphabet. Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, Wa. e-mail: cweaver@u.washington.edu voice: 206/930-4348 > Here's an even worse scenario; I've run into it several times. One author in > a multi-author collection defines a term and uses it. Then another author > discusses the term, saying that "some people use it to mean [what the first > author used it for] but they're wrong, it really means this other thing," and > proceeds to use it for the other thing! I've even had this happen in a book > by a single author! Of course, in a case like this, there is no ideal > solution. I either get the author to decide if I'm on discussing terms with > them, use the "majority" term if there's just one dissenting author or > section of the book, and insert see also references liberally to help the > reader find their way around! > > Do mi > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 16:05:34 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sarah Lee Bihlmayer Subject: Re: HyperIndex for the Macintosh ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Beth asks: >Anyone out familiar with HyperIndex for the Mac? I am just learning to use >it but am having a lot of difficulties with the documentation. > Horrors--there is no index for the manual and it command oriented rather >than organized by function. It leaves out things that seem really obvious. >For example, I can't figure out how to go back over my entries on card 1. > There is a button to go back to your last entry but that's all. Is there >any way to go back to the beginning to check and correct entries? > >Also, I've noticed some errors in alphabetization in the subentries. When I >ask for letter-by-letter I still get before . Am >I missing a step in the formating process? I haven't worked with HyperIndex; however, the "bug" you mention--getting word-by-word alphabetization when asking for letter-by-letter--is probably a blessing in disguise. Why? Well, according to everything I've ever heard, read, or studied on indexing, letter-by-letter alphabetization is not recommended for indices. I never use it, and I've been asked to "fix" an alarming number of "bad" indexes whose major flaw was letter-by-letter alphabetization. |"God is in the details." --Frank Lloyd Wright| | Sarah Lee Bihlmayer * Print/Online/WWW Documentation Specialist | | Indexing * Technical/Developmental Editing * Technical Writing | | Technical Illustration * Electronic Prepress * Graphic Design | |POB 27901-312 San Francisco CA 94127 * 415-207-4046 * tecscrib@sirius.com| ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 16:05:45 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Simon Cauchi Subject: Re: HyperIndex for the Macintosh ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- To "Beth of Houston": I have recently acquired HyperIndex and haven't had any problems with subentries (though I have with subsubentries). However, I've been using word-by-word sorting, not letter-by-letter. If by going "back to the beginning" you mean seeing all the entries in page number order, you can do that by going to Card 3 and clicking on "Specific-Page Entries" in the "Revise" pull-down menu. I find it useful to do that after doing the entries for one chapter of a book. All revision and editing is done in Card 3 (or more precisely Cards 3-13); Card 1 is just for entering. Andre de Tienne would I'm sure be willing to help you. Why not e-mail him directly? From Simon Cauchi, 13 Riverview Terrace, Hamilton 2001, New Zealand Telephone and facsimile +64 7 854 9229. E-mail: cauchi@wave.co.nz ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 16:07:28 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Susan Sandford Pty Ltd Subject: Online Refs ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hello everyone, Some few weeks ago I sent information about "the hub" and the work of Fletcher and Greenhill on citation of electronic sources. Gordon Fletcher has mailed me to tell me of a site which is devoted to the emerging standards of electronic citation. It should be of great interest to indexers. I am forwarding Gordon's message. Check out the site, it looks good. Cheers, Susan >X-UIDL: 830129460.000 >Date: Sun, 21 Apr 1996 01:17:47 +1000 (EST) >From: Gordon Fletcher >To: susans@yarra.vicnet.net.au >Subject: Online Refs >Content-Length: 1252 > > >Hello Susan, > >Thank you for your email a while ago. > >I thought I should tell you about a new "page" that has just come into >our hands. The Information Quality WWWVL which is based at the Coombs unit >at ANU has over the past week delegated us the task of maintaining >the Online Referencing page of the Library. > >THe intention is to maintain a list/catalogue of various pages that provide >suggestions re: online referencing. Currently the page is as we received >it from ANU however now that we are maintaining it we will probably >develop the material further. Suggestions for the page may would be good too. > >Its URL is http://www.gu.edu.au/gint/WWWVL/OnlineRefs.html > >A couple of ideas we are working with are >a table which compares aspects of the various systems in summary or >a Query and Answer page which would allow people to post queries or >provide answers (or suggestions) interactively through a web page. >(An example of this is at http://www.gu.edu.au/gwis/hub/qa/hub.anthqa.html) >Would these be useful - do you have any other suggestions? > >We will also be contacting the authors of the other systems to see if >we can interest them in contributing to an ongoing Query and Answer system, etc. >Yours > >Gordon Fletcher >G.Fletcher@hum.gu.edu.au > > > ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss Susan Sandford, Susan Sandford Pty Ltd., Ph. (+61 3) 9482 2695 Fax (+61 3) 9482 6595 E-mail susans@vicnet.net.au ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 10:31:45 ECT Reply-To: becohen@prairienet.org Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Barbara E. Cohen" Subject: Alphabet ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I'm afraid that one person's meat is another person's potatoes when it comes to the alphabetical order of indexes. I beg to differ with the last post on the subject: my clients who ask for letter-by-letter sort order would not want to see word-by- word order, and they would think I had not completed the index to spec if I provided it in anything by letter sort order. Therefore, it is no help to say that the malfunctioning software is no problem. One cannot change the specs, one must get the software to do as commanded. I'm sure there must be a way to do letter sort in HyperIndex. The suggestion to contact Andre was sound advice. Just sign me: "Another Opinion" -- Barbara E. Cohen Indexing & Editorial Services Champaign, IL ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 10:31:58 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@aol.com Subject: Re: synonyms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- For multi-authored volumes where terminology/vocabulary isn't consistent, I do exactly as Carolyn Weaver suggested. Good advice. It was probably the editor's job to see that this occurred in his/her volume, but barring that, I feel it falls upon me, as the indexer, to provide a consistent vocabulary in my index and not perpetuate the error. Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 10:32:08 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Susan Sandford Pty Ltd Subject: Re: synonyms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Carolyn wrote: >...The object of the index is to help >the USERS find everything in the book on the subject - not to cater to >authors' idiosyncratic vocabularies. I have copies of standard thesauri >for health sciences, psychology, business, etc., and rely on those for >terms when the authors in a multi-authored work don't speak the same >language. > >I will discuss synonyms with the author or editor for a single-authored >work; but for multi-authored works I feel it's my obligation as the >indexer to provide structure/guidance for the user rather than letting >synonyms for the same term scatter all over the alphabet. > This is an even more important point when the work you are indexing will also be issued on CDRom. I worked in-house on a major multi volume encycloaedia of the Australian law which was published in both hard copy and CDRom. Part of my job was to commission and then edit the indexes to ensure that the index was coherent despite there being several indexers working on it. Each "title" in the work was like a textbook on a particular topic and I commissioned the same indexer for the whole title. Nevertheless the pace of the publishing schedule and the size of the work meant that more than one indexer had to be employed on the project. All of the indexes were combined into a cumulative index for the work. This is where the overview of one "editor" was important to cross reference synonyms and to decide on main terminology for the whole work. The position was further complicated by the fact that each title and sometimes each chapter was heavily multi authored. The CDRom was arranged like the book and the index hypertext links were used to jump to the page references. If the synonyms were not properly synthesised then the reader would not find all the "hits". As more works are published on CDRom this is an important point for an indexer to keep in mind. Cheers, Susan. ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss Susan Sandford, Susan Sandford Pty Ltd., Ph. (+61 3) 9482 2695 Fax (+61 3) 9482 6595 E-mail susans@vicnet.net.au ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 14:54:19 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Joyce Nester Subject: Indexing software ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- I am very new to indexing and really appreciate all the good tips and news on this list. I am ready to order indexing software and would sincerely appreciate the benefit of the experience of those on the list. If at all possible, I would like to avoid making a mistake on such a major purchase. If any one would like to offer pearls of wisdom, I would really appreciate hearing from you on or off list, as appropriate. Many thanks! Joyce Nester nester@vt.edu ~~~Joyce Nester~~~ ~~~Special Collections~~~ ~~~P.O. Box 90001~~~ ~~~Virginia Tech, University Libraries~~~ ~~~Blacksburg, VA 24062-9001 ~~~Voice~(540) 231-9205~~~ ~~~Fax~(540)-231-9263~~~ ~~~Internet: nester@vt.edu~~~ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 14:54:30 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rachel Rice Subject: HyperIndex ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Beth asked about HyperIndex. I've used it for 4 indexes now, and do very well with it. I have had some problems, but Andre, the author, is extremely helpful in answering questions and solving problems, and gets back to me very quickly. I'd suggest contacting him. He is also willing to write special scripts for you if you need some unusual routine. You can check and edit entries in cards 3-13, so you don't need to go back to your original entry. If you want to, (but why?) just select (highlight) the whole entry in whatever card (3-13), and then click on Copy to Card 1. It will create another entry, so you have to go back and delete the one that you wanted to change. BTW, you can enter straight into cards 3-13, but you have to make sure you put in the commas correctly, or HI won't know which is the entry, subentry, etc. Hope this makes sense. I don't know about the alpha-sorting prob. That's a good one for Andre. Hope this is useful. Rachel Rice Chilmark, Mass. rachelr@tiac.net, http://www.tiac.net/users/rachelr/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 14:54:39 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Indexing Services Subject: ASI Denver Conference ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hi, my name is David Cohen. Myself and our 3 children will be joining my wife, Joan Griffitts, at the ASI conference in Denver in May. The children and I will be planning a few daily outings, and were wondering if there are any other adults/children who might be interested in discussing a joint sightseeing adventure. Some of the places I was thinking of include The Musuem of Natural History/IMAX theatre, US Mint, Bill Cody's grave, and Red Rocks Park and amphitheatre. I'm also considering a long day trip to Rocky Mtn. Nat'l Park. If you think you might be interested in talking about this, reply to indexsvc@indyvax.iupui.edu. This is just for informal discussion-- no obligations or committments on either part. Thanks. David Cohen indexsvc@indyvax.iupui.edu ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 09:32:09 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: BethJT@aol.com Subject: Re: HyperIndex for the Macintosh ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Thanks for everyone's responses. I got a lovely note from Andre De Tienne (on private email) but figured that since list people were kind enough to respond I would cross-post my response. Here goes my response to Andre & Simon: I understand that I can go over my entries on cards 3 - 13 but those have already been sorted into alphabetical clumps (A's and B's, C's and D's, etc.). I was hoping for some way to review entries in the order in which they are entered. I really like to quickly scan my entries to make sure that my depth of coverage is even throughout the text. Is there some way of seeing a list of all the entries in page number sort? What have I missed? As for the sorting of subentries, I can understand a reluctance to allow for a letter-by-letter subentry sort if it is that complicated to program. Now that I know, I can compensate for that idiosyncrasy in the program. Sarah Lee Bihlmayer posted: Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DVech@aol.com Subject: USDA Indexing Courses ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Hello... I'm thinking seriously of taking both courses with USDA. Have others taken these courses and did you find them valuable? I would love to hear comments and/or criticisms on the courses, and how long they took to complete. Thanks much. By the way, I'm fairly new to listserv groups and hope I'm doing this correctly. Sandie ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 09:32:58 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Hannah King Subject: FW from Prufrock-l: ASJA contracts watch 4/12/96 (author online rights) I thought this might be of interest to others, so I'm passing it on. Grace ---------- Forwarded message ---------- ASJA CONTRACTS WATCH CW960412 Issued April 12, 1996 The American Society of Journalists and Authors encourages reproduction and distribution of this document for the benefit of freelance writers. Reprint or post as many items as you wish, but please credit ASJA for the information and don't change the content. * * * * * ATLANTIC MONTHLY has settled a two-and-a-half-year-old federal lawsuit brought by a writer after the magazine sublicensed his article to an electronic database without consent. The complaint against Atlantic by Rutgers professor H. Bruce Franklin was part of a suit filed in 1993 with the support of the National Writers Union. The action pitted 11 writers against four publishers and two database producers. Five of the six defendants--the NEW YORK TIMES, NEWSDAY, TIME INC. (for SPORTS ILLUSTRATED), LEXIS-NEXIS and UMI--mounted a joint defense, while Atlantic fought alone...until it threw in the towel. The others so far are holding to the position that they were within their rights. No one's talking about how much Atlantic paid--the settlement agreement gags both sides--but the publisher pledged to negotiate with freelancers for e-rights in the future. The Wall Street Journal reported the development, but oddly enough, the story has been missing so far from the files of the Times and other major media. ATLANTIC had seemed to be undercutting its own defense in December 1994, after computer users noted that many articles weren't to be seen in its America Online edition. As reported in ASJA Contracts Watch of January 10, 1995, the online staff explained innocently: "Unfortunately, we do not have the electronic rights to articles published before November 1993." Another possible factor in Atlantic's change of heart: the February announcement that HARPER'S would pay off contributors for past database use of their work and share future royalties through the AUTHORS REGISTRY, giving Harper's a writer-friendlier air. Meantime, the WASHINGTON POST has joined the list of publishers who have settled with an individual freelancer without benefit of litigation. A writer accused the Post of illicitly putting a Weekend section article online. In fairly short order, the Post pulled the piece and paid $500. A suggested confidentiality clause, which would have required silence on the matter, was rejected by the writer. And K-III COMMUNICATIONS has begun to pay restitution to writers whose articles it sublicensed to online and CD-ROM databases. Late last month, NEW YORK contributors were sent checks for $55 per article, partial payment for what's owed. For a few of the prolific, the take is already in the thousands. What's happening at GRUNER + JAHR? Contracts from G + J (publisher of such major titles as McCALL's, FAMILY CIRCLE, PARENTS, CHILD and FITNESS) call for three years of free e-rights, but many strong-willed writers, insisting they won't turn over the rights free for even an hour, have managed to have the provision dropped. Now, the company is reported ready to hold, at last, a long-awaited meeting between legal and editorial. Contributors are anxiously waiting to learn who prevails. If G + J editors lose the battle to do fair business by paying for e-rights, their writers have options: + Writers for FAMILY CIRCLE and McCALL'S can turn instead to WOMAN'S DAY, which pays for articles it uses on AOL. + Writers for PARENTS and CHILD can think about PARENTING, which pays for what it puts on AOL and its Time Warner Web site. + Writers for FITNESS can submit queries to HEALTH and AMERICAN HEALTH, both of which pay for e-rights. In fact, one writer who was given a rough time by McCALL'S, which has begun to try a harder line with some freelancers, recently declined an offer that came with a free-e-rights string firmly attached. The writer went instead to WOMAN'S DAY, where he ended up with a contract calling for one and a half times the fee plus the magazine's usual option of AOL use for $100. Writers continue to lob disdain on the NEW YORK TIMES. Critic Jacques Barzun, novelist Jane Smiley and former Times food writer Mimi Sheraton are among the latest to sign onto the campaign mounted by freelancers' organizations after last summer's announcement of an all-rights policy by the newspaper. The list of writers booing the Times, now grown to nearly 600, was recently forwarded to Times editors and managers with a release headed "New York Times Backs Down, but Not Far Enough." Several sections of the paper, the message explains, either don't even offer the contract Times management once insisted was mandatory or backtrack when a writer rejects it. These include the Magazine, Book Review, Op Ed, Travel, Arts & Leisure and Living. The anti-Times memo was issued by ASJA, the AUTHORS GUILD, the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SCIENCE WRITERS, the NATIONAL WRITERS UNION and WASHINGTON INDEPENDENT WRITERS. A controversial 2-to-1 ruling by a federal appeals court panel allowing photocopying of books and articles for university coursepacks without permission or royalty has been tossed out. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit this week sent the case back for a rehearing "en banc" (before the entire court) following a petition by three book publishers who had sued a Michigan copy shop. The AUTHORS GUILD, ASJA, TEXT AND ACADEMIC AUTHORS ASSOCIATION and the AUTHORS REGISTRY jointly supported the publishers in an "amicus" brief, arguing that the court was off-base in finding that authors prefer wide dissemination of their works to compensation. Payment, the authors' groups said, does matter, and copying as much as 30 percent of a book does not constitute "fair use." Meantime, in the court's backyard, at the copy shop that produces coursepacks for Western Michigan University, it was business as usual even before the reversal. "We're still going through the same procedure of checking copyrights," a Copy Desk manager told the Western Herald, the WMU student newspaper. "We don't think the decision will stand." The LOS ANGELES TIMES has launched a World Wide Web site that promises to include, by the end of this month, articles back to 1990. Users will pay $1.50 per story. The Times is offering advertisers promotional pages and links to their own sites, with prices starting near $2,000 a month and ranging to $6,000 for a spot on the Times home page. Those who've done freelance pieces for the paper may want to look for theirs in May, especially if they never licensed electronic rights: http://www.latimes.com. * * * * * Many ASJA members and others send a steady stream of contracts, information and scuttlebutt so that these ASJA Contracts Watch dispatches can be as informative as possible. To thank all contributors individually would be impossible. You know who you are. So do we. * * * * * The American Society of Journalists and Authors (ASJA) is the national organization of leading freelance writers. Inquiries from all are welcome: Contracts Committee, ASJA, 1501 Broadway, New York, NY 10036, telephone 212 997 0947, fax 212 768 7414, e-mail 75227.1650@compuserve.com. ASJA Home Page may be found at http://www.eskimo.com/~brucem/asja.htm To receive each edition of ASJA Contracts Watch automatically by e-mail, send the following Internet message: To: LISTPROC@ESKIMO.COM Text: SUBSCRIBE ASJACW-L FIRSTNAME LASTNAME You'll receive only occasional official dispatches: no reader responses, no flooded mailbox. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 10:10:30 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Re: synonyms ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- At 15:22 18/04/96 ECT, you wrote: >----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >Judy Press wrote: >>----------------------------Original message---------------------------- >>If the author talks about term X on page 30, then on page 33 he mentions that >>term X is also sometimes known as term Y, and then on other pages talks about >>term X, should term Y be indexed just on page 33 or on the other pages as >>well. If a person were looking up Y in the index he wouldn't find it on the >>other pages, so it would be misleading to list them. On the other hand, he >>will find the same concept on the other pages. Opinions? >> Kevin Mulrooney replied: > >Thus in my opinion using a "see also" is a poor means for vocabulary >control. I use the approach several others have described: > >1) double post all terms at both places if only a few >2) use a "see" to send readers to the preferred (i.e., author uses most) >term if there are 1 or more subs >On the other hand I agree with the comment about users being confused about >"looking" for one word but being made to "search" for another. Although I >don't do it now, perhaps a format like putting the synonym forms in square >brackets after the preferred/chosen term would help readers. > Kevin's letter, which introduces a point I think is crucial here, has finally prompted me to join in this discussion. If two synonyms are used in the text, and only one is used in the index (with a reference from the other) the user will be totally confused when looking for information, *unless* they know that the words are synonymous, and recognise them both in the text. I indexed a book on AIDS, in which different authors used the old term _Herpes zoster_ or the new term _Varicella zoster_ to describe the same virus (which causes shingles). After checking a few reference sources to be sure they were the same, I decided to use the new term with a reference from the old term. I was concerned, however, that if someone looked up _Varicella zoster_ and was sent to a page on which this term never appeared, they might miss the information. I had to some way tell them that _Herpes zoster_ was the same bug, and did this by using the entry: _Varicella zoster (Herpes zoster)_ Without this I think they could have missed all the references using the old name. An interesting follow-on. By coincidence I indexed the next edition of the book (it was then published by a different publisher, and the job was passed on to me by a busy indexing colleague), and I found that writers were *still* using the old form of name. So much for quality editing, and for the medical profession keeping up to date! Glenda. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Jermey & Glenda Browne, Blaxland NSW Australia E-mail - jonathan@magna.com.au Web - http://www.magna.com.au/~jonathan -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If everybody on the Internet sent you one piece of junk mail, it would take three-and-a-half years for you to clear your mailbox. Report any unsolicited mail to the sender's postmaster. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thought on censorship: How come sticking sharp objects in people is OK for kids to see, but sticking blunt bits of people in people isn't? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 10:01:31 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Joanne Clendenen Subject: Biography ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Well, folks, I'm going to get everyone thinking about old-fashioned biographical indexing today. Question: Should I cite the works of the biography's subject when mentioned and quoted in the index? I would include substantive instances of works of other authors mentioned, but since the book is about the subject, should I include his works as well? Question: Also, for those of you who do this kind of book, what's your philosophy on how much to put under the subject's name? I always have to debate this with myself. I automatically put material in that is about the subject (e.g. illnesses, marriage, appointment to university position, etc), but what about his views on the main subjects of his life's work, which form the major themes of the book? Most of the book is about his views on society, authority, political power and freedom. Of course all of these items are listed separately. What would you look for under his name? Thanks for your comments. Joanne Clendenen (Beginning the great sweat-a-thon in Houston, ugh!) "How can democracy and freedom be maintained in the long run under the dominance of advanced capitalism?" Max Weber, 1905 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 10:01:41 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lonergan Lynn Subject: indexing groups ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- On Thu, 11 Apr 1996, Elaine Shuman wrote: > Has anyone worked in an indexing group?... > What has that experience been like? Also has anyone worked > with another indexer, either as an apprentice or mentor? I sort of work with an indexing group. I am the assistant editor of the Air University Library Index to Military Periodicals (AULIMP). The AULIMP includes 76 periodicals. Reference librarians and bibliographers here at AUL index most of the periodicals. Five titles are indexed by librarians at other military libraries. I index 11 titles. The indexing I do is reviewed by the editor of the AULIMP. I review the indexing done by everyone else. I select which articles will be indexed in all 76 periodicals and write the citations. I train new librarians to be indexers and provide feedback as long as is necessary. The experienced indexers are not reluctant to tell me I should pick up an item I missed or discard one I had selected. There is a committee to approve new subject headings and the discussion can get spirited. Two of the bibliographers were once in this position so I seek them out occasionally. The librarian I replaced works across the hall in cataloging and I will ask her advice if necessary. Although we don't work as a "group" we have a common goal of supporting the students at AUL and that does bind our efforts together. Sorry to have taken so long to respond to the initial inquiry but we are changing hardware, software, and trying to get out the first quarter all at the same time. Lynn A. Lonergan Assistant Editor/Librarian Air University Library 600 Chennault Circle Maxwell AFB AL 36112 334-953-2504 LLONERGAN@MAX1.AU.AF.MIL ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 10:01:52 ECT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Mary Prottsman Subject: MACREX/printer codes for italics ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- MACREX-I need to convert default printer codes for 'underline' to 'italics' for HP DeskJet 500 printer. Will anyone give me step-by-step instructions, including the printer codes for 'italics'? Thanks Mary Prottsman prott1@ns.awanet.com