Article
February 18, 2025
0 comment
by Stephen

Pointing Readers in the Right Direction

Welcome back to this mini-series on the basic elements of an index.

I’m currently looking at what makes up an entry, which I described as “what this thing is + where to find it.” In my previous post I discussed main headings and subheadings, which form the first part of that equation. Today, I’m writing about the second part, “where to find it,” also known as locators.

Locators are the portion of the entry which tells readers where to find information about the main heading and subheading. They are like directions for the reader to follow. To be effective, locators need to be clear, specific, and accurate. 

There are three points that I want to make about locators.

The first is that a locator can be anything. Page numbers are usually the default locator, especially when indexing books, but other forms of locators can also be used, such as paragraph or policy numbers. The only criteria is that the locator is appropriate for the material being indexed.

My second point is that the locator needs to be clear and specific. Readers should understand how the locator relates to the text, and should be able to easily use the locator to find the desired information.

To give a few examples, page numbers are often augmented when referring to figures and tables or to footnotes and endnotes. For figures and tables, the page number may be placed in italics or bold, or have a fig. or t appended. For notes, the note number is usually appended to the page number, as in 253n43 or 265nn14-15. These allow the reader to more quickly pinpoint the information on the page.

For a cumulative index for a journal or multivolume series, the locator should probably include a volume or issue number alongside the page number, as in VII.343. For a policy document that I update every couple of years, I use unique policy numbers instead of page numbers, as in 20.2.1.2. These policy numbers both direct readers to the specific policy more quickly (especially if there are ten or more policies listed per page), and makes updating the index a whole lot easier as I don’t need to worry about the pagination shifting as policies are added, removed, and revised. 

When augmenting page numbers or using something different for a locator, it may be helpful to explain your choice in a headnote so readers understand how to interpret the locator. Page numbers, being the default, don’t need to be explained.

To give a few examples of locators:

conduction, 83, 84fig. 

convection, 85, 84t, 234n43

safety protocols, 2.1.13.4, 3.3.1.12, 3.4.3.6

thermodynamics, VI.343, IX.23

The last point I want to make is that the number of locators in an array should be reasonable for readers to search. As a general rule of thumb, no more than 6-10 undifferentiated locators. Larger arrays, with more than ten locators, should have subheadings to sort the references and make it easier for the reader to identify the relevant aspects of the subject. The concern is that searching through a long string of undifferentiated locators is time-consuming and may discourage the reader from finding what they need. Better to set the reader up for success by presenting locators in smaller chunks.

 

When writing an entry, the main heading and, possibly, subheadings, tell readers what the subject is, while the locator tells readers where to find information about that subject. Locators can be anything, and should be clear and specific. The number of locators should also be reasonable for readers to search. Do this, and you are setting your reader up for success.

Article
February 4, 2025
0 comment
by Stephen

Telling Readers What This Thing Is

In my last post I wrote about entries and arrays, which I described as the building blocks of an index. I defined an entry as “what this thing is + where to find it.” Today I’m going to expand on “what this thing is,” also known as main headings and subheadings.

The fundamental purpose of an index is to guide readers to the relevant information that the reader is searching for. To do that, the index needs to be clearly written, which begins with the first words that the reader sees. 

Main Headings

The main heading, also known simply as the heading, kicks off the entry. This is the first word or phrase that you see in an entry and array. It is typically a noun, and should be clear and concise. If a longer phrase is needed, the main heading should lead with the most important element. The main heading should also match how the term is used in the text, such as using the same spelling and capitalization. 

The heading should be reflective of both the text and the audience. Is the book discussing cars more generally or electric vehicles specifically? Or both? Will readers be reading this book to learn about the auto industry, new innovations, or specific brands and models? Or all of the above? To give another example, biblical characters such as Matthew, Silas, and Timothy probably don’t need a gloss clarifying their identity in a work of biblical studies to clarify their identities, but these names may be more unfamiliar to readers if they appear in other disciplines. 

Another consideration is whether or not to pluralize main headings. Should it be dog or dogs? Cantaloupe or cantaloupes? To start, be mindful of differences in nuance. Freedom is somewhat different from freedoms, for example. Otherwise, I tend to follow common usage. If a term is commonly pluralized, then I go ahead and make it plural in the index, which I think reads more naturally. 

To give a few examples of main headings:

Acts (biblical book)

Cleveland, Grover

electric vehicles

heat transfer

London (ON)

trade wars, retaliatory

Subheadings

For short arrays containing a handful of locators, a main heading is usually sufficient to specify what this thing is. But more specificity is often needed for topics with extensive discussion (usually when there are more than 6-10 locators) or if there are different aspects that readers would appreciate differentiated.

The subheading is placed after the main heading. Its purpose is to further clarify what this thing is. Because subheadings often differentiate references from one another, there are usually multiple subheadings per array.

Since the subheading is appended, there is more flexibility in how it can be phrased. Depending on the context, the subheading can be either a short word or phrase, or it can be longer and more descriptive.  In all cases, the relationship between the main heading and subheading should be clear. If possible, I try to also lead with the key word, which both affects how the subheadings are alphabetically sorted and, I think, makes it easier for readers to find the subheading as they scan the array. 

For example,

Acts (biblical book): authorship; within biblical canon; commentaries on; Paul within

Cleveland, Grover: first presidency; free-silver issue; legislative achievements; private life between presidential terms; second presidency

heat transfer: conduction; convection

Effective headings and subheadings connect readers to the text. Main headings are the point at which readers encounter the index, and readers should not need to guess what this thing is. The same is true for subheadings, if the reader decides to read further into the array. 

Tell the reader what they need to know. Be specific and concise. Do this, and your index will be well on its way to being excellent.

Article
January 21, 2025
0 comment
by Stephen

The Building Blocks of an Index

An index is a document that is scanned to find information. It usually spans several pages. But if you had to break an index down into its smallest part, what would that be?

An index is not like most books or documents in that it does not contain a narrative. It cannot be reduced to plot points or the components of an argument. An index doesn’t even contain proper sentences. Instead, an index is a compilation of references. Broken down, the smallest unit within an index is an entry. 

An entry has two components. Basically, “what this thing is + where to find it.” Using indexing terminology, this is “main heading + locator.” Or, to add another level of specificity, “main heading + subheading + locator.” From the entry, the reader can identify what they are looking at and where to find it in the text. For example,

Foxconn, 45

semiconductors: geopolitics of, 67

The second building block is an array. I like to think of an array as containing everything that an index—and by extension the book or document—has to say about a particular subject. If you want to learn about Foxconn, you search for the Foxconn array. Want to learn about semiconductors, you search for the semiconductors array.

If there is only one mention, then a single entry can serve as a single array. But more often, there are multiple discusses throughout the book, which lead to the creation of multiple entries. Combined together, the entries create an array.

Foxconn, 45, 49, 51-52

semiconductors: fabrication techniques, 54-57; geopolitics of, 67; history of, 23-25; properties of, 34, 44

Why are entries and arrays so important? No one writes an index composed of a single entry.

But every index begins with an entry, and as the index is written, the entries and arrays accumulate. It is through knitting the entries and arrays together than an index emerges.

Step one to writing an index is to write clear, concise, and specific entries, so that “what this thing is” is clear to the reader. Step two is to combine entries into arrays which are clearly organized and easy to scan. Step three is to sort and organize the arrays—creating the structure of the index—so that the index as a whole is easy to navigate. 

Each of these elements—the entry and the array—fit together, like interlocking pieces, to create a coherent whole.

A Note about Terminology 

I’ve noticed that not every indexer, including books about indexing, distinguishes between entries and arrays. I’m guilty myself of using the terms interchangeably, though I try to be clear when I’m writing.

But while terminology varies, I do think that the distinction is important. Because an index is composed of hundreds or thousands of pieces of information, it helps to know what these pieces are and how they interact with each other. An index is also easier to edit and organize if these building blocks are clearly written and well thought out.

As you index, how are these building blocks fitting together? How can you be more mindful of each piece of information and how it interacts with the entries and arrays around it? Does it make a difference to think about indexing as building up from the smallest unit to the larger whole?

Article
January 7, 2025
0 comment
by Stephen

Goodbye 2024, Hello 2025

Happy New Year! How is this first full week of 2025 shaping up for you?

I am having a slow start. I enjoyed unplugging from email and work for two weeks. I’m also recovering from a cold.

December was crazy busy, wrapping up nine indexes, which included a children’s book, one project which was simply names and biblical references, and two scholarly books that I began in November. So not quite as much work as nine indexes may sound, but still more than I bargained for. That was due to a couple of projects slipping and arriving when I did not expect and also, if I’m honest with myself, I did accept too much for December and didn’t leave enough margin for complications. 2024 was an odd year and I was trying to make up some missed income, but I should have been more disciplined and said no to a couple of projects.

2024 in Review

2024 was all about buying a house and moving. That dominated everything else in my life, including indexing. I’m thankful for this house. It still feels a bit surreal that I have a permanent place to live. I have always lived in anticipation of needing to move again within the next 1-4 years, and so a part of me is waiting to move again, another part is reassuring myself that I can stay where I am, and a third part doesn’t know how to compute living in a place for longer than four years. One day at a time, I guess.

Moving, settling, and learning the maintenance rhythms for this particular house has also taken time. There were a few months over the summer when I was indexing part-time at best. That impacted the number of projects I was able to complete, along with my income, so I am especially thankful for Elim, my wife, who is earning more than me. 

Looking at the numbers for 2024:

  • 44 indexing projects (down from 52 in 2023)
  • 25 trade books, 18 scholarly books, plus an index for a policy document that I update every couple of years
  • Worked with 12 publishers (30 indexes), 12 authors (1 index each), 1 professional association and 1 policy institute (1 indexes each)
  • 34 projects were from clients within Canada, 8 projects from clients in the US, and 2 projects from clients in Australia.

Overall, my numbers are fairly similar to 2023, despite fewer projects. My ratio of trade to scholarly books is similar, as is projects from publishers vs. authors, and where projects are coming from. I am very thankful for the publishers I work with and who continue to send me work year after year. Having these positive relationships and not needing to actively market as much definitely makes my life easier. 

One interesting point: one publisher sent me 11 books to index in 2024, which is 25% of my total projects. All of the other publishers sent me between 1-3 projects each. While I always enjoy working with that one publisher and I hope to continue to do so, I think this speaks to the value of working with a wide range of publishers, especially if they are fairly small companies. One or two publishers are not enough to fill my schedule, but 10+ combined keeps me fairly busy.

Indexing Highlights

Do you ever notice that certain topics can appear in waves, with two or three books in a row on a similar subject? I find that often happens to me and I wonder why. Very serendipitous. 

In the past few months I indexed two trade books on the Empress of Asia and the Empress of Ireland. These were both ocean liners owned by Canadian Pacific Steamships. The Empress of Ireland collided with another ship and sank in 1914 in the St. Lawrence River, causing the death of 1,012 people, Canada’s worst maritime disaster. The Empress of Asia had a longer career, serving in both WWI and WWII, before being sunk by the Japanese near Singapore. Reflecting their different trajectories, Beneath Dark Waters: The Legacy of the Empress of Ireland Shipwreck, by Eve Lazarus (Arsenal Pulp Press, 2025) is tightly focused on the collision and aftermath, while Oceans of Fate: Peace and Peril Aboard the Steamship Empress of Asia, by Dan Black (Dundurn Press, 2025) follows the Asia over its 30 year lifespan. Both focus on the lives of the passengers and crew, which is what brings these harrowing stories to life. I recommend both if you enjoy maritime history. 

Taking the prize for the most unexpected subject matter is Dialectics of the Big Bang and the Absolute Existence of the Multiverse, by Gregory Phipps (University of Alberta Press, 2024). Did you know that the first second after the Big Bang can be divided into six epochs? Difficult to study empirically, and so Phipps uses Hegelian dialectics to unpack what may have happened. A fascinating read, and also very challenging to index. Philosophy is not my strong suit. Thankfully the author seemed happy with the result. 

Whither 2025?

For 2025, my keyword is margin. I want time to write, to work on the house, to spend time with Elim, and for exercise and rest. This means managing my indexing schedule so that I’m not constantly chasing deadlines and needing to work long hours. I still have an income target, which is a decent amount but also about 10% less than what my target has been in the past. And I’m okay with that. The pace of work hasn’t felt healthy or sustainable, and I don’t like feeling like there are areas of my life I am missing out on.

So here’s to finding a better balance in 2025.

Article
November 20, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

Making the Index Invisible

So the 18th edition of the Chicago Manual of Style dropped in September. I have to admit I have not bought a copy. While I think their recommendations are solid, I find I don’t use it very much, since I only index and not edit. But I do know some editors who are very excited about the new edition, and there has been chatter among indexers as well on the changes to the chapter on indexing.

The main change in regards to indexing is 15.66, which states:

Chicago now prefers the word-by-word system of alphabetization over the letter-by-letter system (but will accept either in a well-prepared index).

 

I think this change makes sense.

I personally most notice the difference in sorting when indexing Asian studies books, where I tend to see a lot of surnames like Chen, Kim, and Liu. Being so short, these names often get mixed up with other headings when sorted letter-by-letter, whereas I think the index is easier to scan if all of the surnames are sorted together. I’ve also received instructions from a scholarly press to sort the index letter-by-letter except for the names, which the press wants force-sorted word-by-word. Which begs the question: why not sort the entire index word-by-word?

For example, here is a comparison of letter-by-letter compared to word-by-word.

Letter-by-letter sorting
Liang Ji
Liang Qichao
Libailiu (Saturday)
Li Boyuan
Li Chen
Life Weekly
Lin Meijing
Li Shirui
List, Friedrich
Liu Denghan
Liu Jiang
Liu, Jianmei
Liu, Lydia
Liushou nüshi (Those Left Behind; film)
Liuxuesheng (overseas Chinese students)
Liu Yiqing
Li Yuanhong
 
Word-by-word sorting
Li Boyuan
Li Chen
Li Shirui
Li Yuanhong
Liang Ji
Liang Qichao
Libailiu (Saturday)
Life Weekly
Lin Meijing
List, Friedrich
Liu Denghan
Liu Jiang
Liu, Jianmei
Liu, Lydia
Liu Yiqing
Liushou nüshi (Those Left Behind; film)
Liuxuesheng (overseas Chinese students)
 

The word-by-word sorting, for me, is a lot easier to scan and parse when like surnames are grouped together, and when names are sorted together above other terms. It makes me confident that I am seeing all of the names present, rather than being concerned that I am missing a name that is buried below.

Also note that the Liu names are sorted according to the clarified 15.85, which states:

When the same family name is inverted for one person but not for another (e.g., “Li Jinghan” and “Li, Lillian”), the names may be listed together and alphabetized by first names regardless of the comma.

 

This also makes a lot of sense and has been my practice for a long time. By ignoring the comma, the second portion of the name is treated equally for all names, whereas if the comma is taken into account, all the names with commas sort to the top and may cause some names to appear out of order. For example,

Liu, Jianmei, 48
Liu, Lydia, 91
Liu Denghan, 148n6
Liu Jiang, 105
Liu Yiqing, 27, 144n13
 

For another interesting comparison, as a colleague pointed out, try looking for the sorting differences in the indexes between the 17th and 18th editions of the CMOS. And if you’d like to see a full list of the changes to the indexing chapter in CMOS 18,see here.

So will I now unilaterally switch to word-by-word sorting for all of my clients who request that the index follows CMOS? I don’t think so, unless I think that the index will really benefit. I think it is better if I first ask my clients if they want to change, so we are both on the same page and I am not springing a surprise on them. And, to be honest, for most indexes I don’t think that the difference between word-by-word and letter-by-letter sorting will be that noticeable.

This brings me to my larger point, which is that the mechanics of a well written index should be invisible to the user. I doubt that any reader will browse the index and think, “I wonder what the alphabetical sort is?” That is not the reader’s concern. What the reader cares about is quickly finding information.

To facilitate finding information, every aspect of the index needs to work together. This includes the sorting, the structure, term selection, phrasing, and cross-references. When it works, the reader shouldn’t notice how the index works because the reader is too busy digging into the book. When the index does not work—that is the point when the reader is pulled out of the index and is frustrated at their inability to access the information they want. The reader may not be able to articulate whythe index is not working, but something about the contents and mechanics of the index is wrong.

Bringing this back to sorting, for many indexes the difference will be negligible between letter-by-letter and word-by-word sorting. As CMOS states, they will accept either in a well-prepared index. For other books, like for me with Asian studies titles, the difference will be more pronounced.

When indexing, pay attention to when the difference matters. Make decisions based on what will make the user experience the most seamless. Pay attention to how the different elements of the index fit together. Striving to make the index invisible may be an odd way to think about indexing, but to be invisible means that the index works, which is what we ultimately want for our readers.

Article
November 5, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

Paying Attention to Terminology

I am writing today about some decisions that I needed to make on a recent index. In the grand scheme of the index, these decisions only affected a few entries. I am tempted to brush these off as not very important and not worth discussing. Yet much of indexing is about paying attention to the details without getting lost in the details. And I think this is a unique situation that illustrates an important point about term selection. At least, it made me sit up and think carefully as I was working.

A good index encapsulates two different goals, which can sometimes seem like they are in opposition to each other. The index needs to be both a reflection of what the author has written and be an attempt to clearly communicate with the reader. Lose one of these aspects, and the index ceases to function.

Term selection is key to achieving both of these goals. The terms used in the index need to both match the text and how the reader is likely to search. Ideally the author and the reader are in alignment, but sometimes the author uses different language than what the reader might expect. In those situations, the index may need to bridge the gap.

I recently ran into this issue when writing the index for Saint Paul the Pharisee: Jewish Apostle to All Nations, by Father Stephen De Young (Ancient Faith Publishing, 2024).

If you are familiar with Christianity, the title may be a hint that the author is taking a different tact with terminology. While Paul was a pharisee prior to his conversion, he is now more commonly known as the Apostle Paul, or Paul the Apostle. Yet here Fr. Stephen is emphasizing Paul’s Jewishness.

In the book’s Introduction, Fr. Stephen addresses this question of terminology:

Throughout this book, I have deliberately eschewed certain language. This language is certainly acceptable and has become the usual language of the Church. However, familiar terminology can sometimes be misleading. By using the word Messiah instead of Christ, community instead of church, or Torah instead of law, I hope to unsettle commonly held notions and help the reader reassess Paul in his historical context, rather than project the experience of present-day Christians into the past.

 

This shift in terminology also extends to names, which is where I noticed the biggest difference in regards to the index.

In addition to “Paul the Pharisee,” Fr. Stephen also frequently refers to Paul by his former name, Saul of Tarsus. Jesus is referred to as “Jesus of Nazareth,” rather than Jesus Christ. A figure such as the Apostle John, also known as John the Evangelist, John the Theologian, or John the Divine, is here referred to as John, the son of Zebedee. None of these names are incorrect, but they are names that are less commonly used. They support the author’s focus on Paul and the early Church’s Jewish context and alerts readers that the author is taking a different approach.

From an indexing standpoint, do I follow Fr. Stephen’s lead? By using these names, I would provide continuity with the text and reinforce the point that Fr. Stephen is trying to make. But will readers still recognize these names in the index, outside of the context of the text? I am not helping anyone if I include names and terms that readers are unlikely to recognize.

In the end, I decided to lean into the author’s terminology. Christians form the primary audience for this book and, I assume, are familiar enough with with these Biblical figures, even if these are not the names typically used.

Paul I simply indexed as “Paul.” As the subject of the book, I decided a gloss was unnecessary. I also included a See cross-reference from Saul of Tarsus, for any readers looking under Saul and to keep all discussions of Saul/Paul in a single array.

I indexed Jesus as “Jesus of Nazareth,” with a subheading for “as Messiah,” to reflect how the author discusses Jesus. I indexed the other Biblical figures as is (“Peter,” “Silas,” “Timothy,’ etc…) except for when a gloss or tag was needed to disambiguate (for example, “James, brother of the Lord’ and “James, son of Zebedee”). This is again following the author’s approach and trusting that readers will recognize these names.

I did, however, include glosses for several of the provinces and cities discussed, such as “Achaia (province)” and “Perge (city),” especially the less well-known places (I didn’t include glosses for cities like Athens and Rome). This may not have been necessary, but I personally like knowing where things are and what things are, so as a reader I would have appreciated the differentiation.

As I wrote at the beginning, these names form a small proportion of the overall index. Was it really worth spending time considering how best to balance the author’s approach versus reader expectations? There are plenty of other discussions in the book, such as discussions about Paul’s missionary journeys, the history of the early Church, and theological issues that Paul addresses in his epistles, that I also wanted to get right.

And yet names matter and terminology matters. The index would have presented a different message if I had used more conventional names for these figures and the index would have appeared disjointed from the text. Writing a good index is often about paying attention to the details so that the entire index works together as a whole and in conjunction with both the text and readers. The trick is to see both the details and the whole. It can be easy to lose sight of the big picture.

For this book, while the author opted to shift the terminology to make a point, I decided that most readers would still be able to follow along in the index. I didn’t need to include much in the way of signposts and clarifications. But for other books, extensive use of cross-references and glosses may be necessary. While reflecting the text and the author’s intentions, the index also needs to be responsive to readers. Thankfully, we have tools to bridge that gap.

The first step, though, is paying attention to the language used by the author. The next step is considering the audience. Do the two match? From here you can select terms and write an index that is clear and recognizable to all.

Article
October 22, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

When Potential Clients Ghost Me

Fall has definitely arrived here in Edmonton. Leaves are turning a beautiful golden yellow and the temperature at night is starting to dip below freezing. This year this also seems to be the season for an uptick in queries to index academic books, most of them ready for indexing in December. I’m not sure why this is the case. I find queries can ebb and flow throughout the year, though I don’t think publishing seasons are as important for academic publishing as it is for trade. In any case, I’ve been responding to a lot of emails.

I’ve also noticed a number of authors who seem to be ghosting me. I respond to their queries, sent them an estimate, and never hear from them again.

This is actually good, from my perspective. It means I don’t have to say no and that time slot is kept open for someone who does want to work with me. I am receiving more offers than I can accept, so while I do appreciate a response to inform me that the author is choosing to work with someone else, I don’t mind when potential clients filter themselves out.

I assume some authors simply forget to respond because they are busy. I’ve certainly done that. But why are potential clients choosing not to hire me? Am I doing something wrong in how I present myself, or am I actually doing something right? While I don’t know for sure, I have a few guesses based on the interactions I do have. I think there are two main reasons why I get ghosted, plus four additional reasons why I may not get the job. 

  • I’m too expensive. Especially for authors paying out of pocket. I am sympathetic to authors on a budget. I know that indexing can be expensive and that I am not the cheapest indexer around. I also don’t want to be the cheapest. I believe that the quality of my work and my years of experience is worth something. I am also mindful that I am freelancing in order to earn a sustainable income. So yes, I suspect that I am too expensive for some authors, and I’m okay with that. I see my pricing as a filter, because I know while some potential clients will find my quotes too high, others will find my quotes acceptable.
  • The client doesn’t value or understand what indexing entails. This is also related to price, though not because the client is unable to pay. I sometimes get the sense, from what the potential client writes in their query or the questions they ask, that they see indexing as data entry. They don’t consider all of the analysis, skill, and time that goes into interpreting the text, selecting terms, and structuring the index and arrays. So my quote seems outrageously high for what, to them, seems like a simple and menial task. It is frustrating when potential clients don’t value or understand what it is I do, but I also don’t want to waste my time writing a terrible index to make a low price worthwhile. If the client and I can’t agree on the value of the index, then we are better off going our separate ways.

Those are the two main reasons why I think I get ghosted. But projects can also fall through for other ordinary and legitimate reasons. Here are four common ones I see.

  • Another indexer responds first. Some authors contact multiple indexers and seem to choose the first indexer who replies. While this is incentive to reply quickly, I also find email incredibly distracting, so I’m okay losing out on the occasional project if it means I can carve out uninterrupted time to work.
  • Going with a firmer yes. Some authors don’t have firm dates yet for the index when they contact me. This makes it difficult for me to give a firm yes, especially if my schedule is filling up and I’m concerned about overbooking. Whereas another indexer may have a freer schedule or more flexibility. Which I understand and no hard feelings from me. 
  • An embedded index is needed. I don’t write embedded indexes, so once I realize what they need (which the author doesn’t always realize themselves), I need to reply and decline.
  • My schedule is full. Sometimes I simply don’t have room and I need to say no. 

It still stings when I get rejected or ghosted by a potential client. There is a hit of validation when schedules align and the client decides to accept my quote. But I also recognize that I am in a privileged position. As someone running a one-person business, there is a limit to how many indexes I can write per month. The question becomes: how can I filter the offers and queries to find the best clients and projects to work with?

Part of the answer is pricing, as I already discussed. I am looking for clients with larger budgets.  Marketing—the information I put out about myself—is also important. Can I find projects and clients which align with my own interests? Cultivating long-term relationships with certain publishers and editors is also important to me, as I enjoy their books and they have provided a lot of work over the years.

If you are an experienced indexer and feel like you are drowning in work and queries, then maybe it is time to raise your prices. Some clients may leave, and that’s okay because you can’t serve everyone. Saying no to a potential client, or having a potential client say no to you, can sometimes be the best outcome because it leaves room for a better client and project to come along. Who do you most want to work with? Focus on attracting and serving those clients. 

If you are a newer indexer, what I am writing today may seem irrelevant. I remember being a new indexer with an empty schedule waiting for anyone to get in touch with any project. But as your experience and reputation grows, your schedule should begin filling up too and you will hopefully reach the point where you will need to turn down work. It helps to be prepared for that day, even if you just make a note at the back of your mind that that day is coming. Again, who do you want to work with? How can you adjust your pricing? A no to one project means a yes to something else. 

Article
October 8, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

My Index Editing Process

Last time I wrote about reading like an indexer and what it is I do and look for when reading a text and writing the rough draft of an index. Today I’d like to reflect on my editing process.

A few months ago I started tracking my time when I index. I had previously done so, but not effectively and I eventually gave up. This time, I’ve created a new system and a new spreadsheet that is much easier to use, and I am a lot happier with the results.

One of my insights so far is that I spend about an equal amount of time drafting and editing. I have to admit that this surprised me. I knew that editing took up a fair amount of time, but I didn’t realize that the time spent is often about 50/50. For some indexes, I actually spend a little more time editing, making the time split closer to 45/55 or even 40/60.

Reflecting further on my process, I tend to spread drafting the index over 3-6 days, depending on the length of the book. Whereas I tend to edit within 2-3 days. When drafting, I am learning what the book is about. When editing, I am fully immersed in the index and I treat it more like a sprint. It probably also helps that by the time I get to editing, the deadline is looming.

I’m realizing that I also tend to draft quickly. I do try to write a fairly clean draft, taking into account context, clarity, and relevance, as I previously discussed. I believe in trying to set myself up for an easier edit. But I also know that this is not my final draft and that some things won’t become clear until I’ve read the whole book, and so I also try to keep moving.

Editing an index, for me, is both seeing the index as a whole and going through the index line by line. I like to give myself space between drafting and editing, which usually means sleeping on the draft and beginning to edit the next day. This helps to give me some distance so I can more clearly see the whole index with fresh eyes.

I usually begin by skimming the index, making note of the larger arrays for the metatopic and supermain discussions. This reminds me of the structure I am aiming for, and is a chance to consider if I want to make any major changes. I then start at the top of the index and work my way down, line by line. I know some indexers edit using multiple passes, each pass looking at a different element. I think I would go utterly cross-eyed and unable to make sense of the index if I tried multiple passes. Instead, my goal is to fully edit the array in front of me before I move on to the next. This may mean jumping around the index to also edit related arrays, and sometimes I will go back to re-edit an array if I change my approach, but generally speaking, I systematically move through the index.

With each array, I am first of all looking for clarity. Does the main heading and any subheadings make sense? If there are subheadings, I look to see if any can be combined or reworded, or if subheadings need to be added for unruly locators. I consider if anything needs to be double posted, and check to make sure that is done properly. I consider and check cross-references. I investigate any notes I may have left for myself. I also spot-check a few locators to make sure I understood the text properly. I may also run a quick search of the PDF to see if I missed any references. I don’t check every locator, which I think would be very time-consuming—to a certain extent, I need to trust that my drafting process was thorough and accurate—but these spot checks do provide peace of mind and I do sometimes find errors.

Reviewing arrays with no subheadings is usually quick, unless I’ve left a note for myself or I decide to spot check. Arrays with subheadings take more time. If an arrays has 20+ subheadings, I may spend as much as twenty or more minutes making sure that the array is in order. I often find the larger the book, the larger the index, the more subheadings there will be, and the longer editing will take.

Considering my process, I do wonder if I can shave off time. I could spot check a little less, especially for simple arrays with no subheadings, trusting that I picked up what was necessary. I can also pay more attention, when drafting, to larger arrays, so that editing them isn’t so onerous. I could also explore using more macros and patterns for batching tasks such as double-posting or removing subheadings. What I like about my process, though, is that it is thorough and I can clearly see what is completed and what is still to come. Editing line by line helps to keep my thoughts in order.

Other Approaches to Editing

My approach to editing is not the only approach, of course. I’ve mentioned making multiple passes. I also know of indexers who do a quick edit at the end of each day, while drafting, so that the draft is cleaner. I’ve also heard indexers who say that they do such a thorough job drafting that the editing process only takes them a couple of hours. I don’t know how that works for them. I seem to need a lengthier editing process for the index to gel and come together. And that’s okay. We are all different. What matters is that you find a process that works for you.

I find it interesting to hear how others index, even if it is not something I would do myself. I hope this glimpse into my process gives you something to think about.

Article
September 17, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

Reading Like an Indexer

So you are sitting down to write an index. You scroll to the first page in the PDF, or, if you’ve printed out the proofs, you place the first page on the desk in front of you, and then…what? What is your thought process? How do you decide what entries to extract? How do you read?

Reading to index is different than reading to edit, reading to learn, or reading for pleasure. I think of reading to index as a process of disassembly. I try to identify how the author has written and structured the text, and I then pull apart all of those pieces, big or small, and reassemble them into the form of an index. This is very much an active reading, in which I am identifying, analyzing, and making decisions. 

I generally look for two types of information when I draft an index.

  • Specific details. These are names, places, companies, concepts, etc… that are explicitly mentioned and discussed. These are usually fairly obvious. If there are a lot of names or other such details, I may index a few pages, pick up these details, and then go back and re-read to make sure I also understand the larger discussion.
  • Broader topics. These range from the metatopic—what the whole book is about—to supermain and regular discussions—both themes spanning the book and what specific chapters or sections are about. It is important to have index entries which correspond to these broader discussions, and so in addition to picking up specific details, I try to also understand the big picture. These broader topics are also tied to the structure of the index, as I consider how best to reflect the book’s structure in the index, and as I anticipate that these large discussions will become large arrays, anchoring the index. Depending on the book, as mentioned, I may need to read a section two or more times to properly mine all relevant entries. 

Once I have identified the large and small pieces that the book is made of, I need to decide how to translate that into the index. Here are a few tips I find helpful to keep in mind.

  • Understand what you are reading. This may seem obvious, but I think it is worth stating. The temptation, at least for me, is to guess if I am unsure and to create an entry anyway. And sometimes guessing is the best I can do in that moment. I flag the entry for revisiting later and I move on. What can be more effective, though, is to read ahead a few pages until I do understand, and then go back and create the entry. It’s okay to be patient. Taking the time to understand can pay off later with better understanding of what comes next in the text and with less editing due to a stronger draft. 
  • Place the information in context. Are you looking at a specific detail or a broader topic? How does the detail or topic relate to other details or topics? Can this be turned into a subheading? Should it be double-posted? Is a cross-reference necessary? What other entries does this suggest? While subheadings, cross-references, and double-posts can all be revisited later, when editing the index, I like to start thinking about them while writing the rough draft. The information in the book is an interconnected web, which the index should reflect. So as part of your thought process, get in the habit of looking for these connections. 
  • Filter for relevance. In addition to understanding the larger context, also pay attention to relevance. Think about the audience before you begin writing the index. Consider how much space is available for the index. What should the index focus on? Sometimes I am not sure if an entry is relevant and so I pick it up anyway, labeling it for possible deletion later. But the more I can filter out now, the less I need to cut later. 
  • Communicate with clarity. This is especially true for subheadings. Make sure that readers understand what this entry means. Be concrete and, where relevant, link back to the larger context. You don’t want to leave readers guessing, nor do you want to leave yourself guessing when you come around again to edit.

All combined, this is a lot to do while reading and indexing. It can be difficult to identify both specific details and larger discussions, while also weighing relevance, and paying attention to the context, and thinking about related entries, and thinking about how best to phrase for clarity. Reading to index is a skill that takes practice.

Remember too that the rough draft does not need to be perfect. My drafts are certainly not perfect, and while I am thinking about all of this while drafting, I spend about an equal amount of time editing. 

How you read is up to you. I tend to start reading and I type entries into Cindex, the indexing software that I use, as the entries come to mind. Other indexers prefer to first mark up the proofs, identifying what is indexable and making notes for themselves, before they go back and type up the entries. There is no right or wrong approach, so long as you are paying attention to all aspects of the text, both big and small.

If you are newer to indexing, you may find marking up the proofs to be a good way to visualize or make concrete this thought process. I marked up proofs the first 3-4 years that I indexed, which in hindsight was necessary for me to engrain this way of reading. Once indexing started to become habit, I stopped marking up, though I still read ahead sometimes to better understand what the text is about. 

Writing an index is a unique way to interact with the text. It does require a shift in how you read and see the text. Once you make that shift, indexing becomes easier. 

Article
August 27, 2024
0 comment
by Stephen

One Index or Multiple?

Today’s reflection is in response to a question I received through the feedback survey for my newsletter, Indexing Matters. Thank you very much for your question, and my thanks to everyone who took the time to provide feedback. Your thoughtful responses are very encouraging and have given me good ideas for what to write and focus on.

(And if you haven’t yet given feedback or asked a question about something that is puzzling you about indexing, and you would like to do so, the link to the survey is here. It is anonymous and only contains four questions.)

The question is:

I’m editor in chief for an international non profit publishing often complex niche academic topics…one of the big decisions is, should there be more than one index? Making a separate Scripture index for biblical topics makes sense, but when to make a separate name/place/botantical name index? Is it just by size/length? Having too many indexes seems it could be confusing for some readers.

This is an excellent question. It is more common in certain disciplines to include more than one index. I think the key, when deciding whether or not to include more than one index, is to figure out the underlying why. For that, I think there are two main factors to consider, in addition to discipline expectations. What is the purpose of the index? And, what is the scope of the index?

What is the Purpose of the Index?

For most indexes, the focus is on discussions. The reader should be able to go to the specified page and learn something of value and substance. Passing mentions are left out. Citations are also typically ignored. The index acts as a filter to provide relevant information to the reader.

In some cases, though, the goal is to instead pick up all mentions, including passing mentions and citations. A scripture or ancient sources index is a great example, as that is intended for readers to find every instance a chapter and verse is cited. Name indexes also tend to be focused on mentions, including citations. In these cases, subheadings are typically not used and long strings of locators are acceptable. The goal is to allow readers to see at a glance how often, and when, someone or something is referenced.

In terms of whether to include one index or multiple, think about the purpose of the index. If the goal is to provide a comprehensive road map to the discussions contained within the book, then a single index covering everything is probably the right choice. If there is an element for which you want to pick up all mentions and to provide a quick overview, then that is probably a good element to split out into its own index. This way each index can have its own purpose and the separation can also be a signal to readers to expect something different from each.

A good example are the two indexes for Ancient Pathways, Ancestral Knowledge: Ethnobotany and Ecological Wisdom of Indigenous Peoples of Northwestern North America, by Nancy J. Turner (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2014), which was indexed by François Trahan. François actually won the inaugural Ewart-Daveluy Award, from the Indexing Society of Canada/Société canadienne d’indexation, for these indexes. The first index is an “Index of Plant Species,” in which the plants are indexed by taxonomical names. There are no subheadings and readers can quickly see how often a plant is mentioned. The second index is a “General Index,” which is focused on discussions. In addition to concepts and other types of information, all of the plant species are double-posted in the General Index under their common names and, for those species extensively discussed, subheadings are used to guide readers in their search. These two indexes works well together because they gives readers a choice to search by either common or taxonomical name, and readers can decide if they want a quick overview of the number of references or if they want a more in-depth look at the discussions. If you are interested, the indexes can be viewed here.

What is the Scope of the Index?

Another consideration is to look at the scope of indexable material. A general index contains everything—all relevant names and subject matter. To sort and separate a general index by type of information is to potentially create a dozen or more indexes—for animals, plants, people, companies, concepts, court cases, trains, medical equipment, etc…—whatever makes sense for that book. Creating multiple indexes, each narrowly focused, is not practical and would probably confuse readers.

However, writing multiple indexes may make more sense if there are only two or three elements that you want to pick up. In this case, the two or three clearly defined indexes can be a way to signal to readers that this is it. Readers should not expect to find other types of information.

For example, in 2016 I indexed Exploring the Capital: An Architectural Guide to the Ottawa-Gatineau Region, by Andrew Waldron (Figure 1 Publishing). Two indexes were requested, one for buildings and one for designers, which covered people and architectural firms. Readers are offered two clear options for how to search. Another example is Hunters on the Track: Willian Penny and the Search for Franklin, by W. Gillies Ross (McGill-Queen’s University Press), which I indexed in 2019. In that case, the client did not have the budget for a full index but still wanted something. The press suggested two indexes, one for names and one for places. I suggested adding a third, for ships, as ships also seemed important to the narrative and Arctic exploration. So that is what we did: three indexes, no subheadings, focused on a quick overview of all people, places, and ships. Nothing else was indexed.

All that said, even if only two or three elements are picked up, a single index may still be the best choice. As I recently discussed, my index for To See What He Saw: J.E.H. MacDonald and the O’Hara Years, 1924-1932, by Stanley Munn and Patricia Cucman (Figure 1 Publishing, 2024), at the publisher’s request, only focused on paintings, people, and places. All three elements are contained within a single index. I think it still works, though, because there is not much else that is indexable. Readers are unlikely to be looking for anything else, and so the index isn’t contravening reader expectations by pretending to be more general than it actually is.

Discipline Conventions

As I mentioned at the beginning, it is common in certain disciplines to include multiple indexes, whether that is a scripture index in Biblical studies texts or a separate name index so readers can see who is cited. If you are aware of these conventions and expectations, then that can also be a good reason to follow suite. However, I suggest also asking yourself if there is a further underlying reason why multiple indexes makes sense. Do different elements in the book need to be handled differently in the index? Is everything being indexed or is the focus much narrower?

The goal, as always, is to make the index(es) user-friendly and to meet user expectations. It may be that following convention is the best way to meet those expectations, or it may be that the convention doesn’t really make sense for your purpose, in which case I would go ahead and write the index(es) that would be the most useful.

​

For the books I typically index, both trade and scholarly books in the humanities and social sciences, a single, general index focused on discussions is usually what is required and expected. With the exception of scripture indexes, I usually prefer to write a single index which includes everything. That said, multiple indexes are definitely an option. They can be another tool that you can use to both meet expectations and shape expectations, depending on what you want the indexes to accomplish.