On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 11:06:38 -0700 (MST) "Lee Passey" <[email protected]> wrote: > "What's in a name? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." > It seem to me that the notion of an "authoritative" name is so 19th > century. > What I would expect is an author record that permits an unlimited > number of Also Known As's without any indication of preference > (i.e. /every/ name is an alternate name).
While this is a good notion, there are problematic transliteration issues which are pretty much the same as a typo and amounts to the same as if I was to refer to the poet as Shaikespeer. There *are* rule sets in place for this kind of thing. Look for instance at a common spelling of a famous Russian composer: Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. This transliteration applies several rule sets in one name - the letter Ч is transcribed as 'ch' in the patronymic middle name, while it is transcribed 'tch' in the last name. The problem arises that - of course, in a database like this one, one will have to use the name used on the book. Do you see it as reasonable that every transliteration, even the incorrect ones, are presented equally? Sincerely, Morten _______________________________________________ Ol-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
