Re: QUESTION: Consistent Index Entries

Subject: Re: QUESTION: Consistent Index Entries
From: Bev Parks <bparks -at- HUACHUCA-EMH1 -dot- ARMY -dot- MIL>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 17:27:45 MST

If you were just using the acronyms and their meanings, I would
suggest using duplicate entries with no "see" references, as follows--
Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP), pg#, pg#
...
SNMP (Simple Network Management Protocol), pg#, pg#

But, it appears that each of your entries has several
subentries; so you may not want to duplicate everything under
the major entry.

My gut feeling is that, in this case, consistency may be more
important than common use. If you're going to use "see"
references on the acronym entries, then do so in all cases.

=*= Beverly Parks =*= bparks -at- huachuca-emh1 -dot- army -dot- mil =*=
=*= "These opinions are mine, not my employer's." =*=
=*= =*= =*=
=====================
Paul MacGyver Carman <paul -dot- carman -at- HARRIS -dot- COM> asked-->
How would you handle the following index quandry?

* Generally, in my index I include acronyms with a "see _insert
acronym meaning here_" and no page number. The corresponding
entry includes all of the information.

Occasionally, however, the acronym is more important that the
terms for which it stands.

Would it be acceptable to consistently mix my standards?

For example:
Simple Network Management Protocol (see SNMP)
SNMP
xxxxx
yyyyy
zzzzz
_and_
View Builder
xxxxx
yyyyy
zzzzz
VB (see View Builder)

With our customers, the acronym "SNMP" is used more than the terms
for which it stands. The term "View Builder," however, is used more
often than its acronym.


Previous by Author: Re: Serif Apologist
Next by Author: Re: Shrink-wrap
Previous by Thread: Re: QUESTION: Consistent Index Entries
Next by Thread: Re: QUESTION: Consistent Index Entries


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads