 |
 |
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