Permuted indices

[Dick Dunn]

amull at Morgan.COM (Andrew P. Mullhaupt) writes:
> cpcahil at virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) writes:
> > Hmm,  looks like a real RTFM type of question.  Let's see.  I think
> > we'll start at the permuted index...  Lets look up the word "swap"...
...
> You can start in the Bermuda index, but that takes a strong stomach;
> a lot of people get lost in those and are never heard from again.
...
> Has anyone ever made a utility which converts Bermuda indices into
> human readable form?

A fun posting, but I don't get much from it.  What's wrong with a permuted
index?  Seems pretty obvious to me:  Think of useful words that might have
something to do with the topic, look them up until you find something that
helps.  It's far more useful than the traditional index in one particular
sense: context.  For example, if you want to know how to do something to a
directory, it's easy to go to "directory" in the perverted index and scan
down the possibilities, with a few words to suggest whether it's what you
want, than to come up against a conventional index entry that will look
something like:
	directory: 3, 7-8, 11, 35, 37, 49-51,
		103, 119, 128-130, 211, 218

In fact, I've found that a permuted index is one form of computer-ish
presentation that non-computer folk can grasp, and appreciate, almost
immediately.  It takes me about 15 seconds to explain.

Obviously you disagree; can you tell us why?  What do you find difficult
about a permuted index?  (I'm skeptical, of course...but I'm always
interested in what people have trouble understanding and why.)
-- 
Dick Dunn     rcd at ico.isc.com  -or-  ico!rcd          (303)449-2870
   ...Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.