Search (23 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Register"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Wright, J.C.: ¬The world of embedded indexing (2000) 0.05 
    0.049614616 = product of:
  0.07442192 = sum of:
    0.04794772 = weight(_text_:electronic in 217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04794772 = score(doc=217,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.24434407 = fieldWeight in 217, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=217)
    0.026474198 = product of:
      0.052948397 = sum of:
        0.052948397 = weight(_text_:publishing in 217) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052948397 = score(doc=217,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.21591695 = fieldWeight in 217, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=217)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Here's the scenario: Your favorite client calls to tell you they are changing their processes. "We've decided to go completely electronic and embed the indexing in the files. Can you do that?" It looks like your life and the way you do your work is going to change if you say yes. But before you do, make sure you know enough about the new process to know whether you want to take on the project. Embedded indexing brings a whole new level of complexity to the indexing process. You will need to incorporate new software technologies and special editing/index-compiling skills with the traditional thought and analysis that has always gone into the indexing process. What do we mean when we say you can embed indexing into files? The simplest answer is the one that Nancy Mulvany gives in Indexing Books: Embedded indexing software is generally a feature found in word processing or page design software such as WordPerfect or Ventura Publisher. Embedded indexing software allows the indexer to insert index entries (or tags for entries) directly into the document's text files. In other words, instead of writing an index in CINDEX, Macrex, or SkyIndex, you put the index entries directly into the same files that are used to create the book. Many companies use Microsoft Word, PageMaker, FrameMaker, or Quark to create their manuals and books, editing, layout, and printing directly from the program files. Pasting up pages manually and creating galleys are not part of electronic publishing. Everything lives in files, from the time it is written until the time it goes to the publisher's printing plates. When you embed indexing codes into these files, the publisher has no worry about what page numbers go into the index until the very end. If needed, files can go through layout, content and copy-edit changes even after indexing is completed. This approach also permits indexing and text to be re-used in the next edition or even converted into hyperactive links!
  2. Connolly, D.A.: ¬The many uses of Email discussion lists (2000) 0.02 
    0.02397386 = product of:
  0.07192158 = sum of:
    0.07192158 = weight(_text_:electronic in 216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07192158 = score(doc=216,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.3665161 = fieldWeight in 216, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=216)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    If you want to let other indexers know about a great new medical dictionary, discuss the pros and cons of using prepositions in subentries, find an indexer in Phoenix, or maybe share some marketing tips, then consider joining an email discussion list. Email discussion lists provide numerous tools and opportunities for indexers, especially for freelancers. Despite the rapid growth of Web- and graphical-based communication, email remains the linchpin of electronic communication. While the World Wide Web has become ubiquitous in our society, email remains the most reliable form of electronic communication. Email access is more prevalent than Web access, less cumbersome, and some would say, more egalitarian. Despite improvements over time, Web access is not available in equal quality or proportion to email access, especially in poorer or developing areas. Indeed, many users who have access to both restrict their use of the Web for important research efforts, and maintain nearconstant connection with their email servers for daily business
  3. Ross, J.: ¬The impact of technology on indexing (2000) 0.02 
    0.018134607 = product of:
  0.05440382 = sum of:
    0.05440382 = product of:
      0.10880764 = sum of:
        0.10880764 = weight(_text_:22 in 263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10880764 = score(doc=263,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 263, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=263)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.25-26
  4. Walker, A.: Indexing commonplace books : John Locke's method (2001) 0.02 
    0.018134607 = product of:
  0.05440382 = sum of:
    0.05440382 = product of:
      0.10880764 = sum of:
        0.10880764 = weight(_text_:22 in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10880764 = score(doc=13,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.14-18
  5. Crystal, D.: Quote index unquote (2000) 0.02 
    0.018134607 = product of:
  0.05440382 = sum of:
    0.05440382 = product of:
      0.10880764 = sum of:
        0.10880764 = weight(_text_:22 in 487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10880764 = score(doc=487,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 487, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=487)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.14-20
  6. Matthews, D.: Indexing published letters (2001) 0.02 
    0.018134607 = product of:
  0.05440382 = sum of:
    0.05440382 = product of:
      0.10880764 = sum of:
        0.10880764 = weight(_text_:22 in 4160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10880764 = score(doc=4160,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4160, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4160)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.135-141
  7. Davis, M.: Building a global legal index : a work in progress (2001) 0.02 
    0.01586778 = product of:
  0.047603343 = sum of:
    0.047603343 = product of:
      0.095206685 = sum of:
        0.095206685 = weight(_text_:22 in 6443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095206685 = score(doc=6443,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6443, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6443)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.123-127
  8. Browne, G.: ¬The definite article : acknowledging The in index entries (2001) 0.02 
    0.01586778 = product of:
  0.047603343 = sum of:
    0.047603343 = product of:
      0.095206685 = sum of:
        0.095206685 = weight(_text_:22 in 12) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095206685 = score(doc=12,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 12, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=12)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.119-122
  9. Weinberg, B.H.: Book indexes in France : medieval specimens and modern practices (2000) 0.02 
    0.01586778 = product of:
  0.047603343 = sum of:
    0.047603343 = product of:
      0.095206685 = sum of:
        0.095206685 = weight(_text_:22 in 486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095206685 = score(doc=486,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 486, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=486)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.2-13
  10. Mauer, P.: Embedded indexing : pros and cons for the indexer (2000) 0.02 
    0.01586778 = product of:
  0.047603343 = sum of:
    0.047603343 = product of:
      0.095206685 = sum of:
        0.095206685 = weight(_text_:22 in 488) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095206685 = score(doc=488,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 488, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=488)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.27-28
  11. Anderson, C.R.: Indexing with a computer : past and present (2000) 0.02 
    0.01586778 = product of:
  0.047603343 = sum of:
    0.047603343 = product of:
      0.095206685 = sum of:
        0.095206685 = weight(_text_:22 in 489) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095206685 = score(doc=489,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 489, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=489)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.23-24
  12. Lee, D.: Judging indexes : the criteria for a good index (2001) 0.02 
    0.01586778 = product of:
  0.047603343 = sum of:
    0.047603343 = product of:
      0.095206685 = sum of:
        0.095206685 = weight(_text_:22 in 4162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095206685 = score(doc=4162,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4162, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4162)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.4, S.191-194
  13. Weinberg, B.H.: Predecessors of scientific indexing structures in the domain of religion (2001) 0.02 
    0.01586778 = product of:
  0.047603343 = sum of:
    0.047603343 = product of:
      0.095206685 = sum of:
        0.095206685 = weight(_text_:22 in 4172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095206685 = score(doc=4172,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4172, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4172)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.4, S.178-180
  14. Weinberg, B.H.: Index structures in early Hebrew Biblical word lists : preludes to the first Latin concordances (2004) 0.02 
    0.01586778 = product of:
  0.047603343 = sum of:
    0.047603343 = product of:
      0.095206685 = sum of:
        0.095206685 = weight(_text_:22 in 4180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095206685 = score(doc=4180,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4180, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4180)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    17.10.2005 13:54:22
  15. Olason, S.C.: Let's get usable! : Usability studies for indexes (2000) 0.01 
    0.012823104 = product of:
  0.03846931 = sum of:
    0.03846931 = product of:
      0.07693862 = sum of:
        0.07693862 = weight(_text_:22 in 882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07693862 = score(doc=882,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 882, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=882)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Footnote
    Vgl.: http://www.theindexer.org/files/22-2-olason.pdf.
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.2, S.91-95
  16. Bell, H.K.: History of societies of indexing : part VII: 1992-95 (2000) 0.01 
    0.011334131 = product of:
  0.03400239 = sum of:
    0.03400239 = product of:
      0.06800478 = sum of:
        0.06800478 = weight(_text_:22 in 113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06800478 = score(doc=113,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 113, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=113)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.2, S.81-83
  17. Rooney, P.: How I reused my own index (2007) 0.01 
    0.0090673035 = product of:
  0.02720191 = sum of:
    0.02720191 = product of:
      0.05440382 = sum of:
        0.05440382 = weight(_text_:22 in 737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05440382 = score(doc=737,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 737, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=737)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    8.12.2007 18:41:22
  18. Dextre Clarke, S.G.: Evolution towards ISO 25964 : an international standard with guidelines for thesauri and other types of controlled vocabulary (2007) 0.01 
    0.00793389 = product of:
  0.023801671 = sum of:
    0.023801671 = product of:
      0.047603343 = sum of:
        0.047603343 = weight(_text_:22 in 749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047603343 = score(doc=749,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 749, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=749)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    8.12.2007 19:25:22
  19. Miksa, F.: ¬The DDC Relative Index (2006) 0.01 
    0.0056670653 = product of:
  0.017001195 = sum of:
    0.017001195 = product of:
      0.03400239 = sum of:
        0.03400239 = weight(_text_:22 in 5775) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03400239 = score(doc=5775,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5775, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5775)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The "Relative Index" of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) is investigated over the span of its lifetime in 22 editions of the DDC as to its character as a concept indexing system, its provision of conceptual contexts for the terms it lists, and the way in which the index intersects with special tables of categories used in the system. Striking features of the index that are discussed include how the locater function of an index is expressed in it, its practice of including concepts that have not been given specific notational locations in the system, its two methods of providing conceptual contexts for indexed terms (by means of the notation of the system and by the insertion of enhancement terms that portray conceptual context), and how the index has intersected with three types of special tables of categories in the system. Critical issues raised include the indexing of constructed or synthesized complex concepts, inconsistencies in how enhancement terms are portrayed and the absence of them in some instances, the problem of equating conceptual context with disciplinary context, and problems associated with not indexing one type of special table. Summary and conclusions are extended to problems that arise in studying the index.
  20. Booth, P.F.: Indexing : the manual of good practice (2001) 0.01 
    0.0056506926 = product of:
  0.016952077 = sum of:
    0.016952077 = weight(_text_:electronic in 1968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016952077 = score(doc=1968,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.08638867 = fieldWeight in 1968, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1968)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: nfd - Information Wissenschaft und Praxis 54(2003) H.7, S.440-442 (R. Fugmann): "Das Buch beginnt mit dem Kapitel "Myths about Indexing" und mit der Nennung von weit verbreiteten Irrtümern über das Indexieren, und zwar vorrangig über das Registermachen. Mit einem einzigen Satz ist die Problematik treffend skizziert, welcher das Buch gewidmet ist: "With the development of electronic documents, it has become possible to store very large amounts of information; but storage is not of much use without the capability to retrieve, to convert, transfer and reuse the information". Kritisiert wird die weit verbreitet anzutreffende Ansicht, das Indexieren sei lediglich eine Sache vom "picking out words from the text or naming objects in images and using those words as index headings". Eine solche Arbeitsweise führt jedoch nicht zu Registern, sondern zu Konkordanzen (d.h. zu alphabetischen Fundstellenlisten für Textwörter) und"... is entirely dependent an the words themselves and is not concerned with the ideas behind them". Das Sammeln von Information ist einfach. Aber die (Wieder-) Auffindbarkeit herzustellen muss gelernt werden, wenn mehr ermöglicht werden soll als lediglich das Wiederfinden von Texten, die man in allen Einzelheiten noch genau in Erinnerung behalten hat (known-item searches, questions of recall), die Details der sprachlichen Ausdrucksweise für die gesuchten Begriffe eingeschlossen. Die Verfasserin beschreibt aus ihrer großen praktischen Erfahrung, welche Schritte hierzu auf der gedanklichen und technischen Ebene unternommen werden müssen. Zu den erstgenannten Schritten rechnet die Abtrennung von Details, welche nicht im Index vertreten sein sollten ("unsought terms"), weil sie mit Sicherheit kein Suchziel darstellen werden und als "false friends" zur Überflutung des Suchenden mit Nebensächlichkeiten führen würden, eine Entscheidung, welche nur mit guter Sachkenntnis gefällt werden kann. All Dasjenige hingegen, was in Gegenwart und Zukunft (!) ein sinnvolles Suchziel darstellen könnte und "sufficiently informative" ist, verdient ein Schlagwort im Register. Man lernt auch durch lehrreiche Beispiele, wodurch ein Textwort unbrauchbar für das Register wird, wenn es dort als (schlechtes) Schlagwort erscheint, herausgelöst aus dem interpretierenden Zusammenhang, in welchen es im Text eingebettet gewesen ist. Auch muss die Vieldeutigkeit bereinigt werden, die fast jedem natursprachigen Wort anhaftet. Sonst wird der Suchende beim Nachschlagen allzu oft in die Irre geführt, und zwar um so öfter, je größer ein diesbezüglich unbereinigter Speicher bereits geworden ist.

Authors

Languages

  • e 22
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 20
  • m 3
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes