Better indexes

[geoff-h -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA]

 Dennis Hays wrote <<[WordPerfect] had a much superior
 method. You could create a "concordance" file--a
 separate file with just a list of index words. WordPerfect
 would compare this file against the doc file... and build
 the index.>>

 I can hear Lori Lathrop's howls already! <grin> Having used
 WordPerfect's documentation in earlier versions, I have to
 say that they produced some of the least helpful indexes
 I'd ever used. Dennis is right about the efficiency of this
 approach, but it's important to remember that a concordance
 is not an index... it's the starting point for building
 one, and arguably not the most efficient starting point. If
 you stop indexing at the concordance stage, all you get is
 a list of words stripped of context, and readers need
 context to know whether to flip to page 17 or page 233 to
 find out what the reference "printer" means. An index will
 tell you "printer: configuring" is on page 233 and
 "printer: purchasing" is on page 17.

 The problem with indexing is simple, but nasty: you can't
 automate the job because you need a human to define the
 context for each reference, and to do so in the context of
 the reader's needs. Until the technology gets much, much
 better, indexing is still a human job.

 --Geoff Hart     @8^{)}     geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
 Disclaimer: Speaking for myself, not FERIC.

 TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html