TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: marginal :-) definit... From:Mike Pope <mikep -at- ASYMETRIX -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 29 Mar 1994 17:10:00 PST
While we're on the topic of indexing and glossaries and such, let me pose
this question for general pondering: do you index glossary entries (ie, does
the index lead people to the glossary)?
----------
>From: TECHWR-L
>To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L
>Subject: Re: marginal :-) definit...
>Date: Monday, March 28, 1994 10:40PM
>Kelly Hoffman (and others) asks:
>"It would work for text that you expect will be read serially -- say, for
>an introductory chapter or a tutorial book.
>However, for a book that's more likely to be flipped through (random
>access, rather than sequential ;-), how would you deal with multiple
>references to the same term?"
>Good point. I definitely would include definition locations in the index
>(w/some indication that this is where the term is defined). It wouldn't
work
>in a reference book, that's true, and I probably wouldn't use this scheme
in
>that kind of manual. I guess I should have been more specific in that I
>think it would work great for one of my client's books/audience. We happen
>to know for a fact that they all do read the book, and read all of the book
>(even the parts they don't all need to, which is why we're restructuring
both
>the program and the doc set <grin>).
>The gist of the points that have been raised have to do with marginal
>definitions' suitability for tutorials or intros -- and I wholeheartedly
>agree. I don't want to have to search all over for a definition, and I
might
>have to in a reference book that used this scheme.
>Thanks for the hole-poking -- it's helped me figure out how to structure
the
>things (and where to put them)!
>BTW, I want to apologize for my execrable typing lately -- my fiance's
>keyboard has keys that are slightly smaller than mine. His machine has the
>modem, so I have to use it (growling the whole time). I'm already over
>budget for my modem use this month (I guess it's time to raise the
budget!),
>so I've been trying to cut down on my logon time. I hope it hasn't
>interfered with what I've been trying to say.
>Bonni Graham
>Manual Labour
>President, SDSTC
>BonniG -at- aol -dot- com
