Re: [RDA-L] 264 dates

[James Weinheimer]

On 19/06/2013 01:45, Robert Maxwell wrote:

> Mac, you have brought this issue up often enough, but what do you do about 
> other parts of the record that are geared toward a particular language 
> community? Notes in 5XX fields are going to be in English in English-language 
> records, for example, and for good reason. We use English terms in the extent 
> element. There are lots of places in the record where we use the language of 
> the cataloging agency. I don't see how this differs from using English terms 
> in a publication statement (specifically the date of publication element). I 
> also note that this is not new to RDA. AACR2 also used English-language 
> phrases like "not after Aug. 21, 1492" or "between 1711 and 1719" (21.16G).
>
> And yes, the fact that we record a lot of information within the record in 
> the language of the cataloging agency does imply that a cataloging agency 
> that uses a different language would need to create its own record in its own 
> language, i.e., duplicate records. I don't see any way around that. At least 
> most of our users in Utah wouldn't be happy with records for Chinese 
> resources created by Chinese agencies (the Universal Bibliographic Control 
> ideal) in which the notes, the publication statement, the extent, etc., were 
> all in Chinese.


With the power of modern systems, it is important to realize that "text"
today is not like "text" on a piece of paper. Everybody keeps talking
about metadata and linked data, but those are not the only tools and
there are other developments that are just as important (I think even
more important) and could be incredibly useful. Here is an example of
what can be done today, using a tool that is "free", i.e. from Google
(and we should all now be getting a better awareness of what "free"
means, although in this case, I think it really is free).

I wish I could make a live demonstration of this but I cannot seem to
find a permanent link into the Russian National Library catalog
http://www.nlr.ru/eng/opac/#1, so this is the best I can do at the
moment. Here is a record (in Russian characters) for a book by Mikhail
Gorbachev as cataloged there, and I have chosen their ISBD format:
(after Mark's tests, I think the Russian characters will come out OK)
, ?? ? (1931-).
   ? ? XX  : ??? / ?? , ??? ? ;
[???. ?. ?]. - ?. : Blue apple, 2000. - 175 ?., [8 ?. ??.
??., ??. ?.] ; 22 .
   5000 ???. - ISBN 5-8415-0004-? (? ???.).
   ??? 94(47+57)(093.3)
   ??? 63.3(2)6+?3(0)6,02+?3(2)74,02
   03.19
   I. ? ???. - 1.  ???, 20 ?. 2. ???
?-? ?  - 

When I run this through Google Translate, I get:
Gorbachev, Mikhail Gorbachev (1931 -).
Moral lessons of XX century: Dialogues / Mikhail Gorbachev, Daisaku
Ikeda, [Afterword. Gorbachev]. - M.: Blue apple, 2000. - 175. [8 liters.
col. ill., col. Portree.] 22.
5000 copies. - ISBN 5-8415-0004-X (In per.).
UDC 94 (47 +57) (093.3)
BBK 63.3 (2) 6 + T3 (0) + T3 6.02 (2) 74.02
03.19
I. Daisaku Ikeda. - 1. Recent history, at 20. 2. The restructuring
of social and economic life of the community - the Soviet Union

It doesn't understand some of the Russian bibliographic abbreviations
and ignores them mostly e.g. where it changed " ???, 20 ?."
(Recent history--20th century) to "Recent history, at 20." It did figure
out "col. ill." but considered the "8 ?." (leaves) as "8 liters", which
is pretty funny! It also didn't pick up  "?." as "portrait". Far
from perfect, but not all that bad. The final product is very readily
comprehensible to a person. The biggest error however, is with
Gorbachev's name, which for some reason goes from ", ??
? (1931-)." (Gorbachev, Mikhail Sergeevich (1931-)" to
"Gorbachev, Mikhail Gorbachev (1931 -)." ignoring his patronimic! I have
no idea how or why that happened.

This could also be done with another format that the Russian library
provides, which they call "full" but is actually a simplified XML-type
of delimited information, which I won't append here (and unfortunately,
I cannot link to it).

Google Translate can be made to work as a "mashup" which could work in
conjunction with catalogs. It's easy to implement and I have it working
on my blog, e.g. for my blog in Greek
http://translate.google.com/translate?client=tmpg&hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.jweinheimer.net%2F&langpair=en|el.
I am sure the translation is far from perfect, but someone may be able
to get some kind of an idea of what is there, otherwise it is totally
gone to them. It's helped me with languages I don't understand.

All of this can--and will--be improved vastly and libraries could make
versions for their own purposes (adding authorized forms or URIs?, or
maybe making special translations for specific fields such as the 300
field). Libraries could perhaps be lucky enough to work with Google and
supplement what 

Re: [RDA-L] 264 dates

[Robert Maxwell]

Mac, you have brought this issue up often enough, but what do you do about 
other parts of the record that are geared toward a particular language 
community? Notes in 5XX fields are going to be in English in English-language 
records, for example, and for good reason. We use English terms in the extent 
element. There are lots of places in the record where we use the language of 
the cataloging agency. I don't see how this differs from using English terms in 
a publication statement (specifically the date of publication element). I also 
note that this is not new to RDA. AACR2 also used English-language phrases like 
"not after Aug. 21, 1492" or "between 1711 and 1719" (21.16G).

And yes, the fact that we record a lot of information within the record in the 
language of the cataloging agency does imply that a cataloging agency that uses 
a different language would need to create its own record in its own language, 
i.e., duplicate records. I don't see any way around that. At least most of our 
users in Utah wouldn't be happy with records for Chinese resources created by 
Chinese agencies (the Universal Bibliographic Control ideal) in which the 
notes, the publication statement, the extent, etc., were all in Chinese.

Bob

Robert L. Maxwell
Head, Special Collections and Formats Catalog Dept.
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568 

"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to 
the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.


-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 4:54 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 264 dates

Mark posted:

>They have the option of using the phrasing found in translated versions 
>of RDA.  For instance, in French, there's "[entre 1846 et 1853?]."

Which would mean a duplicate record for each language of the catalogue we 
support.  The idea of IFLA's UBC (Universal Bibliographic Control) was that the 
descrip[tion prepared in the country of publication could be used 
internationall.  Do we really want duplicate recprds for each possible language 
in OCLC?  We don't want duplicate records in our database.

>How would you handle a "between year1 and year2"

Depends on whether the two years are in the same decade for the same century.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

Re: [RDA-L] 264 dates

[J. McRee Elrod]

Mark posted:

>They have the option of using the phrasing found in translated versions of
>RDA.  For instance, in French, there's "[entre 1846 et 1853?]."

Which would mean a duplicate record for each language of the catalogue
we support.  The idea of IFLA's UBC (Universal Bibliographic Control)
was that the descrip[tion prepared in the country of publication could
be used internationall.  Do we really want duplicate recprds for each
possible language in OCLC?  We don't want duplicate records in our
database.

>How would you handle a "between year1 and year2"

Depends on whether the two years are in the same decade for the same
century.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

Re: [RDA-L] 264 dates

[M. E.]

J. McRee Elrod  wrote:

> John F, Myers posted:
>
> >EXAMPLE
> >  [between 1846 and 1853?]
> >  [between 1800 and 1899?]
> >  [between 1970 and 1979?]
> >  [between 1400 and 1600?]
>
> These Anglo centrc phrases will not fly for non English languge materials
> in non English language catalogues.


They have the option of using the phrasing found in translated versions of
RDA.  For instance, in French, there's "[entre 1846 et 1853?]."


>  The AACR2 [194-?], [18--], [197-],
> -15--?], work much better.
>

How would you handle a "between year1 and year2" situation that doesn't
fall under AACR2's decade-/century-specific hyphen method?

-- 
Mark K. Ehlert
Minitex

Re: [RDA-L] 264 dates

[J. McRee Elrod]

John F, Myers posted:

>EXAMPLE
>  [between 1846 and 1853?]
>  [between 1800 and 1899?]
>  [between 1970 and 1979?]
>  [between 1400 and 1600?]

These Anglo centrc phrases will not fly for non English languge materials
in non English language catalogues.  The AACR2 [194-?], [18--], [197-], 
-15--?], work much better.  

There is also the matter of the display space such phrases absorb.

It seems strange to change "b." and "d." to hyphens, reducing text,
while introduce so much extra text elsewwhere.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__