multiple indexes (an existential query)

[Lori Lathrop <76620 -dot- 456 -at- COMPUSERVE -dot- COM>]

Randy Allen Harris (raha -at- WATARTS -dot- UWATERLOO -dot- CA) asks:

> This is mostly for Lori, the cybertechcomm indexmeister, but I'm asking
> over the net to solicit a public reply, in case others are similarly
> wracked with angst over the issue, and because it fits tangentially with a
> recent thread.

> A good many academic books have separate indexes,--e.g., one for
> "subjects"  and one for "names".  The more indexes there are, the more
> aggravating I find it (one linguistics book I know has four separate
> indexes, for subjects, names, rules & principles, and languages).
> But even two adds significantly to my search time, especially since
> they usually come with virtually no navigational help (tabs, headers,
> whatever).

> Why?  Are there readers who prefer this?  Are multiple indexes cheaper
> to produce?  Are some indexers sadists?  Why?

I try not to post messages that may result in controversy, and ... it's
difficult to answer your question without saying some things that could
create some controversy in professional indexing circles.  But ... here
goes ....

The truth of the matter is that some professional indexers and members
of the American Society of Indexers (ASI) were/are librarians who are
infatuated with classification schemes, and they think they're being
creative when they design multiple indexes.  Of course, end users don't
appreciate their creativity as much as other like-minded librarian types.

The INDEX-L mailing list recently had some discussion on this issue
after an indexer mentioned that she preferred to create multiple indexes
and thought they were more useful to end users.  Several other indexers
disagreed; I was one of them.  I wish I'd had your post at that time!
Would it be okay with you if I forward your post to INDEX-L?

Lori Lathrop ----------> INTERNET:76620 -dot- 456 -at- compuserve -dot- com
Lathrop Media Services
P.O. Box 808
Georgetown, CO  80444