Print

Print


This is quite a departure from FRBR and RDA in terms of works. In those, 
translations are the same work, but different expressions. Would there 
be a way in BIBFRAME to model them as the same work?

As for linking translations, the current method of making a note is not 
going to yield much, but in the cases where there is a uniform title, 
that unifies the translations of a work because it uses the same title, 
not a translated title, for all translations:

"Hamlet. German"

"Hamlet. Italian"

kc

On 1/24/17 7:22 AM, Denenberg, Ray wrote:
>
> The question, I think, comes down to this:  If there is a Work, in a 
> given language – English for example -   and that work gets translated 
> into a different language – French, for example; are the English and 
> French versions a single Work or separate Works.  (Is this a 
> reasonable reformulation of the question?)
>
> They are two different Works. They can be related to each another via 
> property bf:hasTranslation, and its inverse, bf:translationOf.   So 
> for example English is the original language of Guns of August and 
> there is a French translation:
>
>              <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustEnglish>
>
>                      a                             bf:Work ;
>
>       hasTranslation 
>    <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustFrench> .
>
> and
>
>    <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustFrench>
>
>         a                             bf:Work ;
>
>  isTranslationOf 
>    <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustEnglish> .
>
> I was hoping to come up with a real-life BIBFRAME example from our 
> conversion, but unfortunately this idea doesn’t work well based on 
> marc records, because although the marc record may tell you that there 
> is a French translation, it doesn’t tell you where it is, and some 
> sort of matching algorithm has to come into play.   We haven’t quite 
> gotten that far yet, which is why I cannot produce a real example yet.
>
> However, as a placeholder, say you have the English (original) and you 
> simply want to express that there is a French translation (but you 
> don’t yet know where):
>
>    <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustEnglish>
>
>                      a                             bf:Work ;
>
>       hasTranslation        [rdfs:label “French translation”  ] .
>
> Please note that I have only considered the simple case where there is 
> an original, and a translation of the original.   There are possible 
> complicating factors:  There may not be one single “original” 
> language; or there may be, but a particular translation isn’t 
> translated directly from the original but rather from an intermediate 
> translation.   I don’t have answers to these situations.
>
> Ray
>
> *From:*Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of 
> *[log in to unmask]
> *Sent:* Monday, January 16, 2017 8:26 AM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* [BIBFRAME] Work record(s) that have Instances with more 
> than one language
>
> Which of the following is valid (either, both…)?
>
> ·If a Work has 2 Instances with different languages then there can be 
> one Work record with 2 Instances and both languages should be in the 
> Work record
>
> ·If there are 2 Instances with different languages then there must be 
> 2 Work records each with one Instance.
>
> Shlomo Sanders
>
> CTO
>
> Tel: +972-2-6499356
>
> Mobile: +972-54-5246298
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
> cid:[log in to unmask] <http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/>
> www.exlibrisgroup.com <http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
m: +1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600