On 11/30/12 12:16 AM, Mark K. Ehlert wrote:
>
>> One list in alphabetic order
>> would be much easier, perhaps coded for use with one or more of WEMI?
> I've already made a single alphabetical list with WEMI labels, to use
> as a cheat-sheet.

Mine is at:

http://kcoyle.net/rda/group1relsby.html

and if you back up to

http://kcoyle.net/rda/

I have a number of other lists there. Feel free to use them, with the 
caveats that: 1) I developed these from exports from the RDVocab 
registry and 2) there is some work underway to review what is in the 
registry, but I won't make any changes to my lists until an entire list 
area is completed.

kc

>
>>> If the intent is to use URIs to describe relationships currently depicted
>>> by our current use of MARC relator codes ...
>> The URIs lead to terms in English.  The $4 MARC codes can be exported
>> in any language.
> The RDA relationship designators and other controlled terms are also
> "codes."  They're given as English words in the text, but can be
> represented using URIs that can point to multiple language labels for
> the same concept.  For instance, a number of the RDA terms at the
> Metadata Registry are available in both English and German, e.g.,
> <http://metadataregistry.org/schemaprop/show/id/374.html>.   Though
> pointing at the same thing via a URI, an English catalog can be set up
> to display the English label, and the German catalog set up to display
> the German label.  Or perhaps even set up to prefer certain words over
> others in a particular language.
>
> To your point about id.loc.gov, maybe LC and/or another group can work
> to develop sanctioned translation-synonyms for the MARC relator and
> other codes.
>
>> So much of RDA and Bibframe is Anglocentric.
> Can't speak to the BIBFRAME since the coding part hasn't come up yet
> aside from references to or examples in RDF/XML and Turtle.
>
> But RDA?  Yes, it is Anglocentric, certainly with regard to its
> vocabularies--it's directed at an English-speaking audience.  Will
> those vocabularies still be Anglocentric when RDA gets translated into
> Spanish?  And German?  And French?
>
> Furthermore, will the RDA term "maps" *mean* the same thing with each
> language?  Likely.  Will that term be *represented* in the same way in
> each translation and in their respective bib records and catalogs?
> Likely no.  English "maps" = German "Karten" = French "cartes".  Using
> potentially the same URI.  But we're still a long way from making this
> happen in a typical library catalog.
>
>> I wonder if our Quebec,
>> European, and Asian clients would accept Bibframe XML markup in
>> English?
> Are they reading the mark-up?  Or is the computer reading the mark-up
> and presenting it in a familiar form on the screen?  Compare reading
> "raw" MARC to reading formatted MARC.  Or reading HTML code versus
> viewing the content of a web page.
>
> If it's an issue, XML isn't limited to tags containing roman
> characters.  Not sure about Turtle or other methods of markup.
>
>> They would certainaly not accept English inclusions in
>> records for non English resources.
> Understandable.  It interferes with the parts of the record that
> should be read by the public--the spelled out bits.  But do they balk
> at the quasi-English MARC codes "lat" and "ger" and "fre" and "eng",
> for instance?
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet