SUMMARY: Indexing gerunds? (was: Indexing verbs?)

Subject: SUMMARY: Indexing gerunds? (was: Indexing verbs?)
From: Christine -dot- Anameier -at- seagate -dot- com
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 13:56:46 -0600

In my original message, I wrote that I often encounter indexes
>. . . where the writer has included generic verbs as keywords. For
example:
>
>Changing
> Item's Class
> Owner Security
> Report's Schedule
>
>If I'm using this index and I want to know how to change a report's
>schedule, I'm going to look under "report" or "schedule"... but definitely
>not under "changing." . . . .
>
>Before I start chopping, can anyone offer a compelling reason to leave
>those entries intact? Or are they just clutter?

The replies were unanimous: leave those entries in. Don't assume your
readers think the same way you do. As Janice Gelb put it, "it's a fatal
error on the part of an indexer to assume that readers are going to look
things up the way *you* would look them up."

Bill Burns commented that these are gerunds, not verbs (oops), and also
said that gerunds in an index are better used as part of a phrase--e.g.,
"editing reports" instead of "editing." A couple of other people made that
point as well.

Several people described scenarios where users might look under the
gerund--perhaps they think in verbs instead of nouns; perhaps they don't
know the terminology (maybe a case of "I need to change that thing but I
don't remember what this software calls it, so I'll look under
'changing'").

Susan Gallagher offered a memorable anecdote:
>. . . there was the student in WordPerfect class who knew it was
>possible to indent a paragraph from both margins but didn't know how
>because she couldn't find "squishing" anywhere in the index.
>
>And so, yes, I'd leave "changing" in your index -- and add "editing"
>and "revising" and "modifying" ... Because you never know how your
>user is thinking.

Geoff Hart described a multiple-access-points methodology:
>Whereas I'm more likely to look under changing, which only goes to show
that
>different people use indexes differently. The key is to recognize this
fact
>and provide at least two points of access: one under the action, with
>subentries for each noun that action affects, and another under the nouns,
>with the list of verbs that apply to that noun. And just like with nouns,
>verbs should also have synonyms: modifying, editing, revising, etc. for
>changing.

Finally, David Berg and others observed that you never see people
complaining that an index is too comprehensive.



Many thanks, everyone, for your insights. You made me re-examine my
assumptions. Looks like I'd better leave those gerunds in the index after
all.

Christine Anameier








^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Develop HTML-based Help with Macromedia Dreamweaver! (STC Discount.)
**NEW DATE/LOCATION!** January 16-17, 2001, New York, NY.
http://www.weisner.com/training/dreamweaver_help.htm or 800-646-9989.

Take XML and Tech Writing courses online! Our instructor-led courses
(4-6 hrs/wk) give you "hands on" experience at your convenience. STC members
get 20% off! http://www.online-learning.com/index.html.
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.


Previous by Author: RE: Doc. departments in the Corporate Org. Chart
Next by Author: Re: teachers turned tech writers
Previous by Thread: Query: "Tear-offs" in PaintShop Pro 6
Next by Thread: How to click one link to simulate a click elsewhere


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads