From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 1-JUL-1996 12:42:27.35 To: CIRJA02 CC: Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9606E" Date: Mon, 1 Jul 1996 12:42:41 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9606E" To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 14:25:00 BST-1 Reply-To: russnh@cix.compulink.co.uk Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Russell Heath Subject: Indexing prepositions Cathy, my wife, is in the process of indexing a Chinese cookery book and would like some advice on how to index long recipe titles containing prepositions. She's looked at several other cookery books' indexes and they all differ. The British Standard is not much help either! She says: Can anyone advise on the following: 1. Are there any articles written about indexing cookery books? 2. Are there any prime examples of well indexed cookery books? 3. Use of prepositions in long recipe titles - is it correct to list the full title of the recipe as it appears in the text, under the main ingredients (which would make the index longer)? One example with two entries: Text title: chicken and pork with peanut sauce should it be: either: pork and chicken with peanut sauce or: pork chicken and pork with peanut sauce and either: sauce peanut, with chicken and pork or: sauce chicken and pork with peanut sauce Also what about the use of "with" ? e.g. mushrooms with-red cooked duck Should this be: mushrooms with red-cooked duck or: mushrooms red-cooked duck, with Some advice from more experienced indexers would be appreciated, thanks. Cathy (on Russell's account) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 12:06:07 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Infojo6363@AOL.COM Subject: Literary Market Place Is Literary Market Place the same as Writers Market Place or are these two entirely different books? I am familiar with the annual Writer's M P, as its commonly found in any bookstore. If its not the same as Literary M P, could someone provide the ISBN or pub details? TIA JP ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 12:17:50 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: GvRaven@AOL.COM Subject: subscribe subscribe GvRaven ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 09:33:09 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: Re: Indexing prepositions Russell and Cathy, You have just honed in on the hardest starting point in indexing cookbooks: deciding on the style. There does NOT seem to be any standard. The length allowed for the index is the most important constraint, followed by the house style, if any, and then it's the indexer's choice. >1. Are there any articles written about indexing cookery books? See KEY WORDS Issue 98, pp. 1 and 4. >2. Are there any prime examples of well indexed cookery books? THE JOY OF COOKING is a classic. But what counts in looking at an index is: does it work? >3. Use of prepositions in long recipe titles - is it correct to list the >full title of the recipe as it appears in the text, under the main >ingredients (which would make the index longer)? This is often a matter of space constraints. I love to see the full recipe title, IF there aren't a lot of subentries. If there are, it's often better to see the main word first. Let's look at the examples: >Text title: >chicken and pork with peanut sauce (I'd capitalize--but that's a style decision--often a house style) > >should it be: > >either: pork > and chicken with peanut sauce I wouldn't use this: the recipe title is "Chicken and Pork with Peanut Sauce" >or: pork > chicken and pork with peanut sauce Yes, I like this. either: sauce > peanut, with chicken and pork >or: sauce > chicken and pork with peanut sauce There's another alternative: sauce (or sauces if you have many) peanut, chicken and port with And don't forget: chicken chicken and pork with peanut sauce OR chicken and pork with peanut sauce Again, I would choose depending on the major style decision you are going with. The second version is perfectly acceptable, because it works. >Also what about the use of "with" ? > >e.g. mushrooms with-red cooked duck > >Should this be: > > mushrooms > with red-cooked duck Yes, this works fine. >or: > > mushrooms > red-cooked duck, with This sounds awkward me. You could also use: mushrooms mushrooms with red-cooked duck if there were many mushroom recipes--however, I like the first alternative. Then there's duck red-cooked, mushrooms with OR duck mushrooms with red-cooked duck In this case, I also prefer the first alternative. Have fun! Elinor Lindheimer elinorl@mcn.org ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:23:40 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: MrsIndex@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Indexing prepositions Regarding this query: >>Should this be: mushrooms with red-cooked duck or: mushrooms red-cooked duck, with<< Does one's choice of style depend on how prominent a part a certain ingredient plays? If the recipe were titled "Red-cooked duck with mushrooms", and turned out to be lots and lots of chicken with mushrooms as a garnish, it seems as if there should be these postings: Duck, red-cooked, with mushrooms, xx Mushrooms, red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx (or maybe Mushrooms, in red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx) Red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx But if the recipe were very mushroom intensive, it seems more appropriate to have these postings: Duck, red-cooked, with mushrooms, xx Mushrooms, with red-cooked duck, xx Red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx What I'm really asking is this: Should one think first about recipe content, and second about parallelism in stlye? Or is it better to have perfect parallelism of style with less reference to recipe content? I tend toward recipe content first, but I'm always unhappy when it means that things don't match perfectly. But then I figure that the reader is probably more concerned about the recipes and isn't very likely to be reading the index in the way that I would. It's such a quandary. Any cookbook indexing advice is appreciated. Allison Brooks ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:02:40 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Conroy Subject: Re: cold calling In-Reply-To: <199606281932.MAA17972@spork.callamer.com> Janet, one of the reasons I usually try and call somebody to whom I've sent a resume package is that I used to work on the other side of the desk and believe me, the amount of letters we would get that started off, "I just LOVE to read and I know I could be a wonderful editor/proofreader/what-have- you" was amazing. Now, it's true that anybody with the credentials that most of us in this group have would usually jump right out of the "slush pile" and into some editor's file. However, those files are tucked away for the most part, and only looked at in an emergency...when the editor's favorite indexer is unable to take on a job. By then, the name association is cold, the resume may be a year or two old, and it's buried under 20 similarly impressive pieces of paper. So I do try to follow up with at least one phone call after I've sent the package. If the person is receptive and sounds even vaguely interested, I generally will continue to check back at intervals...say, every six months or so. You would be amazed at how many times I get a response along the lines of, "Am I glad you called! I just had someone turn me down and I'm desperate to find an indexer." Another thing I do is send out a note to all current clients and hot prospects whenever I do anything new in my business. When I got my fax machine a few years ago, I designed a postcard and sent it out to about 100 of these people. I did the same thing when I got an e-mail address, and so on. I don't usually get personal responses from these kinds of mailings, but again, they serve to keep my name in front of editors who can hire me. And then I call...and they remember me. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:14:12 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Conroy Subject: Re: Toner cartridges In-Reply-To: <199606282232.PAA06352@spork.callamer.com> Diane, I get about 3000 copies from my HP refills, which cost about $90. So $180 for 6000 seems about proportional to me. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 13:17:46 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Conroy Subject: Re: Literary Market Place In-Reply-To: <199606291609.JAA19684@spork.callamer.com> You're talking about two different books: _Writers' Market_, published annually by Writers' Digest Press, which is especially good for =writers= looking for places to submit their work. Also good as a secondary source for information on publishers for freelancers like us. _LMP (Literary Market Place)_, published by Bowker, which is "the" listing of U.S. publishers, imprints, names and numbers, etc. Also has listings of freelancers in various areas, suppliers, printers, etc. This is the Bible for people looking for freelance work; this is where you go to get up-to-date names (not just titles) for editors to contact, types of books a company publishes, etc. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 00:07:00 BST-1 Reply-To: russnh@cix.compulink.co.uk Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Russell Heath Subject: Re: Indexing prepositions Thanks all for your help, I've now got a better idea! Cathy ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 22:39:24 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Elinor Lindheimer Subject: Re: Indexing prepositions Allison wrote: >Does one's choice of style depend on how prominent a part a certain >ingredient plays? If the recipe were titled "Red-cooked duck with >mushrooms", and turned out to be lots and lots of [duck] with mushrooms as >a garnish, it seems as if there should be these postings: >Duck, red-cooked, with mushrooms, xx >Mushrooms, red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx >(or maybe Mushrooms, in red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx) >Red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx >But if the recipe were very mushroom intensive, it seems more appropriate to >have these postings: >Duck, red-cooked, with mushrooms, xx >Mushrooms, with red-cooked duck, xx >Red-cooked duck with mushrooms, xx I would not change the recipe title as in: Mushrooms, with red-cooked duck I figure the recipe author knows what he or she wants, and the index should reflect that. I would also not put: Mushrooms, red-cooked duck with mushrooms even if I was using recipe titles in full as subentries. In cases like this, I would drop the last word for ease of reading: Mushrooms, red-cooked duck with Lastly, I would only put the recipe title as a main heading: Red-cooked duck with mushrooms if there was plenty of room, or if this was a Chinese cookbook and "red-cooked" was an important concept. Hope this helps! Elinor > ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 06:08:16 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carolyn Weaver Subject: Re: Literary Market Place In-Reply-To: <9606291626.AA03881@mx4.u.washington.edu> Writer's Market is an affordable annual publication ($29.95 or so) that is available from bookstores. Literary Market Place is a reference work (also annual) that you should be able to find in most public libraries. Last time I checked the cost was well over $100, which was more than I'm willing to spend for an annual. Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, Wa. e-mail: cweaver@u.washington.edu voice: 206/930-4348 On Sat, 29 Jun 1996 Infojo6363@AOL.COM wrote: > Is Literary Market Place the same as Writers Market Place or are these two > entirely different books? > > I am familiar with the annual Writer's M P, as its commonly found in any > bookstore. If its not the same as Literary M P, could someone provide the > ISBN or pub details? > > TIA > JP > ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Jun 1996 10:57:13 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Neva J. Smith" Subject: Newsletter about copyright for freelancers' work The newsletter below discusses contracts used by writers and publishers and their provisions for electronic rights, royalties, etc. The target audience is the freelance writers' community. Indexers are writers and I think we should keep up with the contract activities of this group. The work made for hire issue is also discussed. Neva > = - * - = < = > = - * - = < = > = - * - = < = > = - * - = < = Neva J. Smith, MLIS DataSmiths Information Services PO Box 2157 / Round Rock, TX 78680 email: njsmith@bga.com voice: (512) 244-2767 Editor, _Library Currents_ PO Box 2199 / Round Rock, TX 78680 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: 28 Jun 96 08:44:57 EDT From: Alexandra Owens/ASJA <75227.1650@CompuServe.COM> To: ASJACW-LIST@SILVERQUICK.COM Subject: CW960628 ASJA CONTRACTS WATCH CW960628 Issued June 28, 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.] ***** Despite a history of insisting on the contrary (and losing some writers in the process), CONDE NAST, it seems, can accept the important principle of separate compensation for electronic rights. Persistent negotiating has given one writer a BRIDE'S agreement in which the fee is allocated "$X for print rights, $Y for electronic rights." The e-rights clause itself remains far too broad, but the division of the fee is a small but significant concession from one of the most aggressively hardline publishers. Persistence has also brought about further improvement at another publishing giant, HACHETTE FILIPACCHI. The company has long agreed to an extra fee for e-rights for authors who require it. Its HOME magazine has been willing to accept limited rights for the fee but the group's largest title, WOMAN'S DAY, has insisted on all formats for all time. Now, WD has agreed for at least one writer that the e-rights supplement will cover only America Online, and only for a year. At GRUNER + JAHR, confusion reigns--again--as the company apparently can't make up its corporate mind whether to bully writers or not. Various editors at PARENTS and McCALL'S have been telling contributors that until a new contract form is released, they absolutely must have free e-rights, although they typically offer to lower the time period from three years to one year. But the editors-in-chief of both magazines tell ASJA Contracts Watch that isn't so. The company still isn't ready to pay for new-media reuses, as some key competitors now do, but according to these top editors, at least, they will still--reluctantly--cross out the nefarious e-rights clause. It isn't all e-rights: All three publishers commonly accept important amendments in several other clauses in their contract offer. Freelancers doing business with any CN, Hachette or G + J magazines may request information about those changes from ASJA. ***** Following discussions with ASJA, the new owner of MS., WORKING MOTHER and WORKING WOMAN this week pledged to introduce a new contract that pays extra for all secondary uses of freelance material, including electronic. But to those owed money for works delivered to the magazines' old owner he makes no promises at all. Jay MacDonald stepped into something of a hornet's nest when, just weeks ago, his spanking new MACDONALD COMMUNICATIONS CORP. bought the three magazines from the long-ailing LANG COMMUNICATIONS. The buzzing came from freelance contributors and staffers left holding Lang IOUs; now, as writers and some organizations step up activity, the buzzing is turning into stinging. Several writers lately have won court judgments against Lang, but collecting may be another story. Yesterday, however, having failed to extract a payment from Lang, a writer sued MacDonald in New York City small claims court. Earlier this month, MacDonald memoed staffers that they could make claims against Lang for "all accrued fringe benefits or pay to which each of you perceives herself or himself to be entitled." He also told the New York Times that the legal obligation for Lang's debts to freelancers remains with Lang. Presumably, courts will decide. In a gesture to writers, photographers and illustrators, MacDonald told ASJA: "We will have a new contract with the creative community that ensures separate compensation over and above one-time print use in whatever aftermarket a contribution is used, including other media we plan to develop." To the question of making good on Lang's debts to freelancers, whether for work published or for pieces in inventory, he would say only, "We're working on it." ASJA President Claire Safran, who has written to MacDonald of the "ethical obligations" to contributors, said yesterday, "We applaud the promise to do the right thing in contracts for future work, and hope these magazines get back on their feet so that freelancers will again be comfortable doing business with them. But we have to wonder how much faith to put in this company while contributors continue to wait for money owed them." ***** The threat of work made for hire has been beaten back in radioland. Late last year, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO told independent writer-producers that it would insist on total ownership of their work because, a spokesman said, "That's what we need to do." Apparently, the need evaporated when the independents said "No way." After months of meetings with a coalition of independents, during which NPR chief operatin officer Peter Jablow himself replaced the in-house lawyer, the sides have tossed out work-made-for-hire. Their agreement, just signed, calls for negotiated fees for rebroadcasts and royalties for sales of tapes and transcripts. Most important, it declares that revenues from electronic and other ancillary uses should be shared. The agreement calls for an 18-month grace period, during which NPR will pay no royalties for new-media use of freelance material while it develops a tracking system. Compensation will be negotiated after the end of 1997 or when NPR's new-media gross reaches $1,250,000. In the meantime, NPR has pledged to "use reasonable efforts to track revenues" from new-media uses and issue individual reports every six months. "NPR is so close to the edge these days," said one independent, "that we're willing to pitch in to help. If this weren't the non-profit world we never would have made the concession on the grace period." Said Jablow: "We are committed to developing a win-win association when it comes to distributing NPR programming via non-broadcast means." ***** A freelancer caught VEGETARIAN TIMES (COWLES) putting a work into electronic databases, despite a contract that didn't allow it. The writer confronted the publisher, which pulled the piece and eventually offered $700. The writer accepted. Then came a release form with a shut-your-mouth clause, asking the writer to say she hadn't and wouldn't talk. "I can't sign it," she told Cowles. "I've already discussed every step of the the settlement with ASJA." "OK," the publisher agreed. "Just say you won't talk about it any more." And so this report can't give the end of the story. ***** 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. Thanks to all. To receive each edition of ASJA Contracts Watch automatically (and at no charge) by e-mail, send the following Internet message: To: ASJA-MANAGER@SILVERQUICK.COM Text: JOIN ASJACW-LIST Only occasional official dispatches: no feedback, no flooded mailbox. Inquiries and information from all are welcome. Contracts Committee, ASJA 1501 Broadway, New York, NY 10036 tel 212-997-0947 fax 212-768-7414 e-mail 75227.1650@compuserve.com Web page http://www.asja.org/