Jon Stroop wrote:
> It's not just about whether or not to display a given version of the 
> title, but how to display it, i.e. left to right, left anchored or 
> right to left, right anchored, fonts, etc.

That is inherent in the Unicode range. The font renderer of your 
software has rules for the display of Unicode characters. There is even 
a way to encode what to do with texts that make use of a combination of 
left to right and right to left, called the Unicode Bidirectional 
Algorithm (

> Also, I wonder if there isn't some judgment involved in determining 
> the script.  If a title were mostly in a particular script, and a user 
> would first and foremost need to understand that script to understand 
> the content of the resource, wouldn't it be most useful to say that 
> field is in that script?  It doesn't fit well with /my/ literalist 
> tendencies, but from a user perspective is the script for 
> anything other than Chinese?

I think we've reached the line here between script and language. The 
language is definitely Chinese, the script is a mixture of Chinese and 
Latin. One title is a translation of the other. I don't know which from 
this display -- they could be parallel titles, but in the case of 
translation, it's the language that is of interest. The discussion of 
scripts referred to representations of the same language using different 
scripts. In that case, script is the issue, not language.


Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
[log in to unmask]
ph.: 510-540-7596   skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234