Search (29 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Register"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Rooney, P.: How I reused my own index (2007) 0.03 
    0.02816204 = product of:
  0.11264816 = sum of:
    0.11264816 = sum of:
      0.063315 = weight(_text_:software in 737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.063315 = score(doc=737,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045514934 = queryNorm
          0.35064998 = fieldWeight in 737, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=737)
      0.049333163 = weight(_text_:22 in 737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049333163 = score(doc=737,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Recycling eines Buchregisters Eine Index-Revision liegt dann vor, wenn das Register zu einer vorhergehenden Auflage eines Buches für die Neuauflage überarbeitet wird. Es gibt Vor- und Nachteile beim Versuch, einen Index zu überarbeiten - sowie verschiedene Erfolgsmaßstäbe. Eine detaillierte Fallstudie wir vorgestellt und die benutzte Software-Methode beschrieben.
    Date
    8.12.2007 18:41:22
  2. Software for Indexing (2003) 0.01 
    0.01399077 = product of:
  0.05596308 = sum of:
    0.05596308 = product of:
      0.11192616 = sum of:
        0.11192616 = weight(_text_:software in 2294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11192616 = score(doc=2294,freq=64.0), product of:
            0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = queryNorm
            0.6198675 = fieldWeight in 2294, product of:
              8.0 = tf(freq=64.0), with freq of:
                64.0 = termFreq=64.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2294)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Knowledge organization 30(2003) no.2, S.115-116 (C. Jacobs): "This collection of articles by indexing practitioners, software designers and vendors is divided into five sections: Dedicated Software, Embedded Software, Online and Web Indexing Software, Database and Image Software, and Voice-activated, Automatic, and Machine-aided Software. This diversity is its strength. Part 1 is introduced by two chapters an choosing dedicated software, highlighting the issues involved and providing tips an evaluating requirements. The second chapter includes a fourteen page chart that analyzes the attributes of Authex Plus, three versions of CINDEX 1.5, MACREX 7, two versions of SKY Index (5.1 and 6.0) and wINDEX. The lasting value in this chart is its utility in making the prospective user aware of the various attributes/capabilities that are possible and that should be considered. The following chapters consist of 16 testimonials for these software packages, completed by a final chapter an specialized/customized software. The point is made that if a particular software function could increase your efficiency, it can probably be created. The chapters in Part 2, Embedded Software, go into a great deal more detail about how the programs work, and are less reviews than illustrations of functionality. Perhaps this is because they are not really stand-alones, but are functions within, or add-ons used with larger word processing or publishing programs. The software considered are Microsoft Word, FrameMaker, PageMaker, IndexTension 3.1.5 that is used with QuarkXPress, and Index Tools Professional and IXgen that are used with FrameMaker. The advantages and disadvantages of embedded indexing are made very clear, but the actual illustrations are difficult to follow if one has not worked at all with embedded software. Nonetheless, the section is valuable as it highlights issues and provides pointers an solutions to embedded indexing problems.
    Part 3, Online and Web Indexing Software, opens with a chapter in which the functionalities of HTML/Prep, HTML Indexer, and RoboHELP HTML Edition are compared. The following three chapters look at them individually. This section helps clarify the basic types of non-database web indexing - that used for back-of-the-book style indexes, and that used for online help indexes. The first chapter of Part 4, Database and image software, begins with a good discussion of what database indexing is, but falls to carry through with any listing of general characteristics, problems and attributes that should be considered when choosing database indexing software. It does include the results of an informal survey an the Yahoogroups database indexing site, as well as three short Gase studies an database indexing projects. The survey provides interesting information about freelancing, but it is not very useful if you are trying to gather information about different software. For example, the most common type of software used by those surveyed turns out to be word-processing software. This seems an odd/awkward choice, and it would have been helpful to know how and why the non-specialized software is being used. The survey serves as a snapshot of a particular segment of database indexing practice, but is not helpful if you are thinking about purchasing, adapting, or commissioning software. The three case studies give an idea of the complexity of database indexing and there is a helpful bibliography.
    A chapter an image indexing starts with a useful discussion of the elements of bibliographic description needed for visual materials and of the variations in the functioning and naming of functions in different software packaltes. Sample features are discussed in light of four different software systems: MAVIS, Convera Screening Room, CONTENTdm, and Virage speech and pattern recognition programs. The chapter concludes with an overview of what one has to consider when choosing a system. The last chapter in this section is an oddball one an creating a back-ofthe-book index using Microsoft Excel. The author warns: "It is not pretty, and it is not recommended" (p.209). A curiosity, but it should have been included as a counterpoint in the first part, not as part of the database indexing section. The final section begins with an excellent article an voice recognition software (Dragon Naturally Speaking Preferred), followed by a look at "automatic indexing" through a critique of Sonar Bookends Automatic Indexing Generator. The final two chapters deal with Data Harmony's Machine Aided Indexer; one of them refers specifically to a news content indexing system. In terms of scope, this reviewer would have liked to see thesaurus management software included since thesaurus management and the integration of thesauri with database indexing software are common and time-consuming concerns. There are also a few editorial glitches, such as the placement of the oddball article and inconsistent uses of fonts and caps (eg: VIRAGE and Virage), but achieving consistency with this many authors is, indeed, a difficult task. More serious is the fact that the index is inconsistent. It reads as if authors submitted their own keywords which were then harmonized, so that the level of indexing varies by chapter. For example, there is an entry for "controlled vocabulary" (p.265) (singular) with one locator, no cross-references. There is an entry for "thesaurus software" (p.274) with two locators, plus a separate one for "Thesaurus Master" (p.274) with three locators. There are also references to thesauri/ controlled vocabularies/taxonomies that are not mentioned in the index (e.g., the section Thesaurus management an p.204). This is sad. All too often indexing texts have poor indexes, I suppose because we are as prone to having to work under time pressures as the rest of the authors and editors in the world. But a good index that meets basic criteria should be a highlight in any book related to indexing. Overall this is a useful, if uneven, collection of articles written over the past few years. Because of the great variation between articles both in subject and in approach, there is something for everyone. The collection will be interesting to anyone who wants to be aware of how indexing software works and what it can do. I also definitely recommend it for information science teaching collections since the explanations of the software carry implicit in them descriptions of how the indexing process itself is approached. However, the book's utility as a guide to purchasing choices is limited because of the unevenness; the vendor-written articles and testimonials are interesting and can certainly be helpful, but there are not nearly enough objective reviews. This is not a straight listing and comparison of software packaltes, but it deserves wide circulation since it presents an overall picture of the state of indexing software used by freelancers."
  3. Ross, J.: ¬The impact of technology on indexing (2000) 0.01 
    0.012333291 = product of:
  0.049333163 = sum of:
    0.049333163 = product of:
      0.098666325 = sum of:
        0.098666325 = weight(_text_:22 in 263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.098666325 = score(doc=263,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.25-26
  4. Walker, A.: Indexing commonplace books : John Locke's method (2001) 0.01 
    0.012333291 = product of:
  0.049333163 = sum of:
    0.049333163 = product of:
      0.098666325 = sum of:
        0.098666325 = weight(_text_:22 in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.098666325 = score(doc=13,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.14-18
  5. Crystal, D.: Quote index unquote (2000) 0.01 
    0.012333291 = product of:
  0.049333163 = sum of:
    0.049333163 = product of:
      0.098666325 = sum of:
        0.098666325 = weight(_text_:22 in 487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.098666325 = score(doc=487,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.14-20
  6. Matthews, D.: Indexing published letters (2001) 0.01 
    0.012333291 = product of:
  0.049333163 = sum of:
    0.049333163 = product of:
      0.098666325 = sum of:
        0.098666325 = weight(_text_:22 in 4160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.098666325 = score(doc=4160,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.135-141
  7. Dienelt, O.: ¬Ein Workshop über Indexing (2003) 0.01 
    0.012320892 = product of:
  0.049283568 = sum of:
    0.049283568 = sum of:
      0.027700309 = weight(_text_:software in 1502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027700309 = score(doc=1502,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045514934 = queryNorm
          0.15340936 = fieldWeight in 1502, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1502)
      0.02158326 = weight(_text_:22 in 1502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02158326 = score(doc=1502,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045514934 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 1502, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1502)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Content
    "Unter der Leitung von Frank Merrett von der Socieryy of Indexers (www.indexers.org.uk), die in Sheffield ihren Hauptsitz hat, fand am 22. Januar in London ein Workshop statt, in dem Einblicke in das Indexing (Registererstellung) ermöglicht wurden. SechsTeilnehmerinnen und drei Teilnehmer (Bibliothekare, Katalogisierer, angehende Indexer, Benutzer von Indices) bekamen durch Merrett neben den grundlegenden Dingen auch ein wenig Einblick in die Berufswirklichkeit eines Indexers vermittelt. Zunächst wurden einige Definitionen dessen, was ein Index ist, angesprochen: Ein Index (Register) ist eine systematische Anordnung von Eintragungen, die es dem Benutzer ermöglichen, Informationen in einem Dokument zu finden (nach Norm BS ISO 999,1996). Auch andere Definitionen besagen, dass die im Hauptteil eines Dokuments enthaltenen Informationen so herausgefiltert werden sollen, dass durch die Benutzung des Registers ein möglichst benutzerfreundlicher Zugang zum Hauptteil erfolgen kann. Ein Index soll den einen Benutzer entscheiden lassen, ob ein Dokument etwas für ihn Interessantes enthält. Dem anderen soll es dazu dienen, das Gelesene wieder aufzufrischen. Ein Index muss beiden gerecht werden. Nach Eintreffen des Materials vom Verlag (sehr oft als Papierausdruck) beginnt der erste Schritt, der vom persönlichen Arbeitsstil des Indexers abhängt. Manche beginnen sofort beim Lesen mit dem Niederschreiben von Begriffen, oft unter Verwendung von Software (Macrex, Cindex), andere markieren oder unterstreichen zunächst die relevanten Begriffe. Hier beginnt die eigentliche Arbeit, die darin besteht, wichtige Informationen aus dem Text herauszufiltern und so aufzubereiten, dass ein Buchleser zu Wichtigem hingeführt wird. Dazu gehören Entscheidungen wie zum Beispiel »was ist wichtig«, »was kann/ muss weggelassen werden«, »wo müssen Siehe- beziehungsweise Siehe-auch-Verweise eingebrachtwerden«. Bibliothekarisch gesehen, ist dies Sacherschließung und zugleich formale Erfassung, letztlich das Aufbauen eines Kreuzkatalogs. So wie ein Sacherschließer muss auch ein Indexer ständig überlegen, mit welchen Begriffen er dem Benutzer des Registers einen guten Zugang zur Information verschaffen kann. Ein gutes Verständnis des Faches, das in der Vorlage behandelt wird, ist deshalb unbedingt notwendig. Das wurde anhand einiger Seiten geübt, genauso wie das Aufbe-reiten des Index. Äußerste Genauigkeit ist hier nötig. Anhand eines fertigen Index mit eingebauten Ungenauigkeiten wurde geübt, sehr genau hinzuschauen und kleinste Ungenauigkeiten zu erkennen. Merrett sagte, dass ein gut geschriebenes Buch besser zu bearbeiten sei als eines, das einen weniger guten Hauptteil hat. Oft hat ein Indexer nur zwei Wochen Zeit für die Erstellung eines Registers. Die wenigsten dürften allerdings ständig von morgens bis abends an einem Index arbeiten, und nur sehr wenige verdienen ausschließlich mit dem Erstellen von Registern ihren Lebensunterhalt. Meistens ist dies ein Nebenjob. Nach Frank Merrett sind die Verhandlungen mit einem Verlag über einen zu erstellenden Index recht vorsichtig zu führen. Insbesondere über die Termine (Eintreffen des Manuskripts, Abliefern des Produkts) sowie die Form der Vorlage (welches Format, welcher Umfang) muss sich ein Indexer absichern, um keine Überraschungen zu erleben. So kann es sein, dass die Vorlage nicht als Buch, sondern als ein Stapel von Druckbogen, ungefalzt und unsortiert, ankommt. Auch das Honorar muß vom Indexer in Anbetracht des zu erwartenden Aufwandes verhandelt werden. Indexer ist keine geschützte Bezeichnung, deshalb kann sich jeder so nennen. Die Prüfungen, die man bei der Sociery of Indexers ablegen kann, sind aber ein Qualitätsnachweis. Die Society kann durch das Aufführen der Namen und Spezialgebiete auf der Homepage beziehungsweise in einem Verzeichnis einiges für die Mitglieder tun. Die Sociery legt auf das Kontakthalten mit Verlegern großen Wert, um dort auf die Dienste der Indexer hinzuweisen. Um Aufträge muß sich aber jeder selbst kümmern.
  8. Diepeveen, C.; Fassbender, J.; Robertson, M.: Indexing software (2007) 0.01 
    0.011060675 = product of:
  0.0442427 = sum of:
    0.0442427 = product of:
      0.0884854 = sum of:
        0.0884854 = weight(_text_:software in 742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0884854 = score(doc=742,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = queryNorm
            0.49004826 = fieldWeight in 742, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=742)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Dieser Beitrag handelt von unterschiedlichen Arten verfügbarer Software zur Erzeugung von Registern und untersucht, ob diese dazu benutzt werden können, ein Register nach internationalen Normen zu erstellen. Da oft behauptet wird, dass die Registererstellung mit einem Computer und ohne Einsatz des Menschen durchführbar sei, untersuchen die Autoren, weshalb Indexieren eine Aktivität des Menschen sein muss und weshalb eine automatische Registererstellung kein zufriedenstellendes Register hervorbringen kann. Automatische Registererstellung kann bestenfalls einen Ausgangspunkt zur weiteren Indexierung liefern. Anschließend wird die Möglichkeit der Registererstellung mit allgemein verfügbarer Software untersucht. Dies kann akzeptable Register hervorbringen, wenngleich oft nur auf mühsame Weise. Für den professionellen Indexierer stellt daher spezielle Indexing Software die bevorzugte Option dar. Die drei am meisten benutzten speziellen Indexierungsprogramme werden kurz bewertet. Ausrichtung und Aussehen dieser Programme sind sehr unterschiedlich, aber die Merkmale und Output-Optionen sind sehr ähnlich. Website Indexing ist ein relativ neues Spezialgebiet innerhalb der Disziplin des Indexierens. Zwei Programme - eine Freeware und ein kommerzielles - zur Erstellung von Registern von Websites werden erörtert. Das Fazit insgesamt ist, dass das Registermachen eine Aktivität ist, die intellektuellen Input des Menschen benötigt. Software kann den Input hervorragend verbessern, aber nicht den Anteil des Menschen daran ersetzen.
  9. Davis, M.: Building a global legal index : a work in progress (2001) 0.01 
    0.01079163 = product of:
  0.04316652 = sum of:
    0.04316652 = product of:
      0.08633304 = sum of:
        0.08633304 = weight(_text_:22 in 6443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08633304 = score(doc=6443,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.123-127
  10. Browne, G.: ¬The definite article : acknowledging The in index entries (2001) 0.01 
    0.01079163 = product of:
  0.04316652 = sum of:
    0.04316652 = product of:
      0.08633304 = sum of:
        0.08633304 = weight(_text_:22 in 12) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08633304 = score(doc=12,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.3, S.119-122
  11. Weinberg, B.H.: Book indexes in France : medieval specimens and modern practices (2000) 0.01 
    0.01079163 = product of:
  0.04316652 = sum of:
    0.04316652 = product of:
      0.08633304 = sum of:
        0.08633304 = weight(_text_:22 in 486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08633304 = score(doc=486,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.2-13
  12. Mauer, P.: Embedded indexing : pros and cons for the indexer (2000) 0.01 
    0.01079163 = product of:
  0.04316652 = sum of:
    0.04316652 = product of:
      0.08633304 = sum of:
        0.08633304 = weight(_text_:22 in 488) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08633304 = score(doc=488,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.27-28
  13. Anderson, C.R.: Indexing with a computer : past and present (2000) 0.01 
    0.01079163 = product of:
  0.04316652 = sum of:
    0.04316652 = product of:
      0.08633304 = sum of:
        0.08633304 = weight(_text_:22 in 489) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08633304 = score(doc=489,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.1, S.23-24
  14. Lee, D.: Judging indexes : the criteria for a good index (2001) 0.01 
    0.01079163 = product of:
  0.04316652 = sum of:
    0.04316652 = product of:
      0.08633304 = sum of:
        0.08633304 = weight(_text_:22 in 4162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08633304 = score(doc=4162,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.4, S.191-194
  15. Weinberg, B.H.: Predecessors of scientific indexing structures in the domain of religion (2001) 0.01 
    0.01079163 = product of:
  0.04316652 = sum of:
    0.04316652 = product of:
      0.08633304 = sum of:
        0.08633304 = weight(_text_:22 in 4172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08633304 = score(doc=4172,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2001) no.4, S.178-180
  16. Weinberg, B.H.: Index structures in early Hebrew Biblical word lists : preludes to the first Latin concordances (2004) 0.01 
    0.01079163 = product of:
  0.04316652 = sum of:
    0.04316652 = product of:
      0.08633304 = sum of:
        0.08633304 = weight(_text_:22 in 4180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08633304 = score(doc=4180,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    17.10.2005 13:54:22
  17. Moncrief, L.: Indexing computer-related documents (2000) 0.01 
    0.010281074 = product of:
  0.041124295 = sum of:
    0.041124295 = product of:
      0.08224859 = sum of:
        0.08224859 = weight(_text_:software in 214) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08224859 = score(doc=214,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = queryNorm
            0.4555077 = fieldWeight in 214, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=214)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The explosion in personal computing and in computer technology has brought a wealth of opportunities for indexers. Annually, traditional publishers produce numerous books on computer topics, while software and hardware companies constantly issue new products with manuals that require indexes. Indexers can find work with these high-technology publishers or can subcontract with technical documentation firms or with freelance technical writers. The range of audiences for computer-related documents is wide and varied, as is the range of topics. These documents are not limited to end-user software manuals, but include programming, Internet, and networking topics among others. Hardware companies, in addition to computer manufacturers, are also a good potential source of clients. Many hardware products have a sizeable software component that requires its own set of indexed manuals. There are advantages and disadvantages to working with high-technology companies (and their contractors) vs. working with traditional publishers. It is simply a matter of personal taste which type of client you prefer. I have truly enjoyed working with both.
  18. Browne, G.: Changes in website indexing (2007) 0.01 
    0.009793539 = product of:
  0.039174154 = sum of:
    0.039174154 = product of:
      0.07834831 = sum of:
        0.07834831 = weight(_text_:software in 747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07834831 = score(doc=747,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = queryNorm
            0.43390724 = fieldWeight in 747, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=747)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Website-Indexing wurde in den 1990er Jahren wichtig, als Indexierer, Bibliothekare und Web-Manager mit verschiedenen Ansätzen experimentierten, einen besseren Zugang zu Informationen zu schaffen, die sie über das Internet anboten. Die Tools, mit denen Register erstellt werden, reichten von simpler HTML-Codierung bis zu HTML Indexer und anderer spezieller Software. Neue Indexe und Software-Produkte entstanden, aber viele Website-Register sind auch wieder verschwunden. Es werden die Gründe für die Erstellung von Website-Indexen dargestellt und Beispiele von Website-Indexen und anderen Zugangsoptionen erläutert, die in den letzten 15 Jahren entstanden, die aber nicht mehr zur Verfügung stehen. Es werden einige Vermutungen über die Gründe für diese Veränderungen angestellt.
  19. Olason, S.C.: Let's get usable! : Usability studies for indexes (2000) 0.01 
    0.008720954 = product of:
  0.034883816 = sum of:
    0.034883816 = product of:
      0.06976763 = sum of:
        0.06976763 = weight(_text_:22 in 882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06976763 = score(doc=882,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15938555 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Footnote
    Vgl.: http://www.theindexer.org/files/22-2-olason.pdf.
    Source
    Indexer. 22(2000) no.2, S.91-95
  20. Holbert, S.: How to index Windows-based online help (2000) 0.01 
    0.008394462 = product of:
  0.03357785 = sum of:
    0.03357785 = product of:
      0.0671557 = sum of:
        0.0671557 = weight(_text_:software in 224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0671557 = score(doc=224,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = queryNorm
            0.3719205 = fieldWeight in 224, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=224)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Today, more and more software packages come with online documentation. Some have complete manuals as well. Others have basic documentation on paper and more advanced information online. I recently purchased a computer that came with 20 software programs and not one page of written documentation. More and more, users have to find information by searching online. Most documentation teams focus on writing and ignore the problems of information retrieval, making information in printed documents difficult to find, and online information impossible to find. With online Help, you cannot browse the documentation. You cannot even browse more than a couple of inches of the index at a time. If online users do not get superb guidance into the jungle of online Help, they go away like the hero of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness, saying "Oh, the horror! The horror!" How does an online Help index work? The following examples are based on the Windows 95 Help-type system, but do not represent actual Help screens

Authors

Languages

  • e 26
  • d 3

Types

  • a 26
  • m 3
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes