From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging
[mailto:pccl...@listserv.loc.gov] On Behalf Of Policy and Standards Division
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 10:39 AM
To: <mailto:pccl...@listserv.loc.gov>pccl...@listserv.loc.gov
Subject: Romanization guidelines
The Library of Congress, Policy and Standards Division
has developed Procedural Guidelines for Proposed New or Revised
Romanization Tables. The division is distributing the draft
guidelines for comment by the library community. We welcome comments
sent to <mailto:pol...@loc.gov>policy<mailto:pol...@loc.gov>@loc.gov
by July 19, 2010.
PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR PROPOSED NEW OR REVISED ROMANIZATION TABLES
These guidelines apply to the creation of new tables and
the revision of existing tables.
Principle/Goals:
· The ALA/LC Romanization Tables should be transliteration
schemes rather than replicating pronunciation. Pronunciation is
variable around the world. Another goal of this principle is to
enable machine-transliteration whenever possible and preferably
reversible transliteration.
· The ALA/LC Romanization Tables should be in line with
internationally accepted standards and/or standards officially
sanctioned by the home country when possible.
Guidelines:
* Examine any existing national and international standards
before beginning the process of creating a new or revising an
existing romanization table.
* Mapping characters to the Latin script
a. Take the equivalent characters used from the MARC Basic Latin
script repertoire as much as possible.
b. Choose a Latin script equivalent for a non-Latin letter, not
necessarily based on pronunciation of the letter, but so as to
maximize clarity and minimize confusion with the transliteration of
other letters. The resulting Latin script equivalents should allow
for the reversal of romanization as systematically as possible,
without the application of special algorithms or contextual tests.
c. Avoid special Latin script alphabetic characters as they are not
always widely supported in display and printing.
3. Modifiers
a. Prefer single letter equivalents (e.g., ) to blends (e.g., sh),
that is, multiple letter equivalents, unless there is no ambiguity in
the use of the blend.
b. Use modifier characters (diacritical marks) in conjunction with
the basic Latin script characters, but take care to avoid modifier
characters that are not widely supported (e.g., ligature marks), or
whose positioning over or under a Latin script base letter may
interfere with the printing and/or display of that letter.
c. Above. It is recommended that the acute (´), grave (`)
and dieresis (¨) be preferred to other modifying characters over base
letters. Use the tilde (), macron (¯), circumflex (), and dot above
( ) characters if needed.
d. Below. Avoid modifiers below characters, since they often
interfere with portions of Latin letters that descend and when
underlining is present. If a modifier below is desired, prefer the
dot below (.) or the cedilla (¸).
* Marks used as guides to pronunciation should not be rendered as
Latin alphabet characters, but rather as diacritics or punctuation
marks to facilitate reversibility.
* Non-alphabetic languages
a. In dealing with non-alphabetic scripts, e.g., syllabic
scripts, the above guidelines should be applied to the extent that they can.
b. Any provisions for aggregation should be based on such
factors as international agreement, convenience of use, promotion of
consistent application, and ease of computer access.
* Other factors. The impact of file maintenance on legacy records
should be considered in revising tables in relation to the ease or
difficulty of accomplishing it, the benefits provided by the
revisions, and the obligations of and impact on various organizations
and institutions.
Process:
* Forwarding proposed new or revised Romanization tables. Submit
all draft tables (new and revised) to the Policy and Standards
Division, Library of Congress, preferably as an attachment to an
electronic mail message sent to <mailto:pol...@loc.gov>pol...@loc.gov
Submit all draft proposals as complete tables in an electronic
format, e.g., Microsoft Word, so that the resultant file may be
updated during the review process. Submit revisions to existing
tables as part of a complete table for the language. If only a part
is being revised, clearly note the proposed revisions either 1)
within the table itself or 2) as a separate document indicating what
the proposed revisions are and the justification for them. Provide
pertinent justification, e.g., experts consulted, sources consulted,
for any proposed new or revised table.
* Library of Congress review. The Policy and Standards Division
and other Library staff with knowledge of the language or script will
review draft tables (both new and revised).
* Other review. After reaching consensus within the Library of
Congress, the Library will seek comments from the community at large,
including the appropriate committee within the American Library
Association. This is done in several ways:
* the draft will be posted on the Cataloging and Acquisitions
Web site (<http://www.loc.gov/aba/>http://www.loc.gov/aba/) with a
request for comments usually within 90 days of the posting;
* the draft table will be published in Cataloging Service
Bulletin with a request for comments within 90 days;
* the draft will be sent to identified stakeholders with the
same 90 days request for comments; and
* the availability of the draft will be noted in a posting to
various electronic lists according to the language. See list below.
* Receipt of comments. The requests for comments specify that
such comments are to be sent to <mailto:pol...@loc.gov>pol...@loc.gov
by a specified date. The Policy and Standards Division and other
Library of Congress staff will evaluate the comments as they are
received. Once the Library reaches consensus, the division will
revise the draft table as appropriate. The Policy and Standards
Division will acknowledge the receipt of comments.
* Approval process. The Library of Congress will forward draft
tables that have been completed to the chair of the appropriate
committee within the American Library Association. Draft tables for
languages of Africa and Asia go to the chair of the Committee on
Cataloging: African and Asian Materials (CC:AAM). Drafts for
languages in other parts of the world go to the chair of the
Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access (CC:DA). If the
appropriate ALA committee has disagreements with the submitted draft
table, it may be necessary to return to one of the steps above.
* The Library of Congress will issue status reports to the
stakeholders and electronic lists noted above.
* Approved tables. Once the appropriate committee has approved
the draft table, the Policy and Standards Division will make any
changes to the table as the result of this process, post the approved
table to the Cataloging and Acquisitions/ALA-LC Romanization Tables
Web page
(<http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/roman.html>http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/roman.html),
and publish the approved table in Cataloging Service Bulletin.
Electronic mail discussion lists
Autocat
(<mailto:auto...@listserv.syr.edu>auto...@listserv.syr.edu)
American Jewish Libraries
(AJL)
(<mailto:hasaf...@lists.acs.ohio-state-edu>hasaf...@lists.acs.ohio-state-edu)
Committee on East Asia Libraries
(<mailto:east...@listserv.unc.edu>east...@listserv.unc.edu)
Committee on Research Materials on Southeast Asia
(CORMOSEA) (<mailto:cormo...@listserv.ohio.edu>cormo...@listserv.ohio.edu)
Africana Librarians Council
(<mailto:alcasal...@lists.stanford.edu>alcasal...@lists.stanford.edu)
Middle East Librarians' Association (MELA)
(<mailto:melane...@googlegroups.com>melane...@googlegroups.com)
Committee on South Asian Libraries and Documentation
(CONSALD) (address to be added later)
