Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Index Trouble

Here's something I just don't understand: cookbook indexes. Today I was looking up the chocolate chip cookie recipe in my Best Recipe cookbook. I looked under cookies and then chocolate chip and found it. But instead of getting a page number I got redirected: "see chocolate - chip cookies". So my question is - as long as they bothered to list it where people are obviously looking why not just give the page number instead of wasting the print and everyone's time by making us look somewhere else? It doesn't make sense! And personally, I think chocolate chip cookies are more appropriately listed under cookies, not chocolate. So there.

3 comments:

Jen Z said...

LOL, that's so funny. True, true...
Jen

Anonymous said...

The only thing that makes sense is that this is left over from pre-computer days. If you are an editor trying to keep the index current for a book as it is being altered, it would be easier to have a primary reference for each article in the index, and refer to this entry with all secondary references. That way if the recipes change pages, you only have to find the primary reference, and the secondary references are "self healing". Presumably the index is now generated by computer and there should be no reason for this work saving strategy.

As for why chocolate chip cookies primary reference is chocolate, I have no clue. I suppose that you are lucky the weren't listed under salt!

susan said...

Ok, that makes sense. And it's nice to finally have some kind of answer because this has happened to me many times! But let's not forget; it only makes sense for the pre-computer days.

How did you know this anyway? Are you in publishing? Or does everyone know this already?!