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:Multiple Index Entries: Your Input, Please...? From:Geoff Hart <ghart -at- videotron -dot- ca> To:TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>, Keith Hansen <KRH -at- weiland-wfg -dot- com> Date:Tue, 23 May 2006 16:20:43 -0400
Keith Hansen wondered: <<In many cases, it's possible to have two (or
more) index entries that refer you to the same page. Example: * Index
Entry No. 1: Users, adding to system . . . p. 264 * Index Entry No. 2:
Adding users to system . . . p. 264>>
Not a professional indexer, but I've done enough reading and practicing
to be a credible indexer. I also use indexes heavily, and know what
works for me, but have done only minor usability testing of my own
indexes with unsuspecting victims (though I received nice compliments).
With those caveats:
<<* Is one of the above formats considered preferable to the other?>>
No. Both are equally useful, just for different situations.
<<I prefer Index Entry No. 1 because it starts with the broad category
you are working with (users) and then lists the specific action you are
performing with that category (adding to system).>>
Both are useful and indeed, I'd recommend including both. The first one
focuses on the subject of a task, whereas the latter focuses on the
task. So people who think in terms of the task will find it under
"adding", whereas those who focus on the subjects of those tasks will
look under "users: things you can do to the poor beggars". I use both
at different times, particularly if the first alternative doesn't turn
up the topic I'm looking for, and I assume most readers are no
different.
<<In a large index (say, dozens of pages), I would probably include
both entries in my index. But what if the index is quite brief (say,
five to 10 pages)? Would you still include both entries?>>
Yup. The goal of an index is to help people find information, not to
meet an arbitrary length limitation. If an entry is useful, then by
definition it's useful irrespective of the index length.
<<My view is that when the index is brief, it's easier for the user to
quickly scan the entire contents. Thus, both entries may not be as
necessary.>>
Don't know about you, but I'll only scan an entire index--even a short
one--if I'm truly desperate. If I don't find something under the first
two or three keywords that come to mind, I'll curse the indexer and all
their descendants, then go to Google to find what I'm looking for.
The purpose of a well-designed index is to eliminate this
behavior--including the curse upon the indexer's house. <g> After all,
forcing users to scan an index, even a short one, is the logical
equivalent of asking them to flip through the documentation scanning
the headers. If the docs are short, why not do this? Because it's not
kind to the user. Same logic applies to indexing.
WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word features support for every major Help
format plus PDF, HTML and more. Flexible, precise, and efficient content
delivery. Try it today!. http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
Doc-To-Help includes a one-click RoboHelp project converter. It's that easy. Watch the demo at http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
