> From [log in to unmask] Sat Jun 1 04:17 MET 2002
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 22:17:14 -0400
> From: "Wagner,Harry" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Registry Translations - Help Wanted!
> Comments: To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>,
> [log in to unmask]
> Comments: cc: "Weibel,Stu" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Dear Shigeo,
> Thanks for your well-placed comments! Since each term's label, definition
> (and optional comment) is translated we could add a dcq:note

There is no "dcq:note"

> (or similar
> element) to each term's translation indicating that the translation is not
> endorsed. Of course the text of the dcq:note would have to be in the
> translated language, but this should not be too difficult since it would be
> the same for each element. Each translated term would have:
>
> <rdfs:label>a translated label</rdfs:label>
> <rdfs:comment>a translated definition</rdfs:comment>
> <dc:description>an optional translated comment</dc:description>
> <dcq:note>text indicating that translation is not endorsed</dcq:note>
>
> Does this seem reasonable?

What is the resource you're decribing?
The provenance information doesn't seem to address the assertions made.
What you do in case of multiple translations?





>
> Best Regards,
> Harry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:15 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Cc: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask];
> [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Registry Translations - Help Wanted!
>
>
> Dear Harry,
>
> Thanks for your great job.
> Multilinguality is a very important feature for the registry.
>
> I'm thinking that we (DC-Registry + DC-LI) need to clarify the status
> of translations to be stored in the DCMI Registry.
>
> I understand that all English descriptions stored in the registry
> are the approved text by DCMI, but descriptions in other languages are
> not approved or endorsed by DCMI.
>
> Should translations to be stored in the registry be "officially approved"
> one by local communities?
> Should non-English descriptions in the registry be translation
> approved as a national standard or translation officially created and
> maintained by an organization approved as a national maintenance agency?
>
> I'm assuming the answer is No.
>
> In the case of Japan, we have no offically approved standard for Simple
> DC, i.e., a counter standard to ANSI/NISO Z39.85.
> I guess the Japanese texts currently stored in the DCMI registry is
> the text translated at ULIS. Since there is no established organization,
> say DCMI-Japan, nobody can endorse the translations. In Japan,
> we'll work on standardization of Simple DC at JIS (Japanese Industrial
> Standard) in near future, perhaps in this fiscal year. After the approval
> at JIS, we (Japanese community) will get our standard DC Simple in Japanese.
>
> One of my concerns about registering translations in the DCMI Registry
> is that translation in a certain language, e.g. Japanese, can be
> recognized as an officially approved translation. And, it may cause
> difficulties in local communities.
>
> My suggestion is to include information about the status of translations
> and/or translators.
>
> As you know, ULIS has been running our multilingual registry. I'm
> thinking that the ULIS registry is recognized by users as a research
> or voluntary activity. However, in the case of the DCMI Registry, users
> would
> recognize the translations as officially approved ones.
>
> I hope my concern is needless, but I think the DCMI Registry need to be
> careful.
>
> Thank you,
>
> -- Shigeo
>
> =========================================================
> SUGIMOTO, Shigeo, Ph.D.
> Professor
> University of Library and Information Science (ULIS)
> postal address: Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8550, JAPAN
> phones: +81-298-59-1348(office), +81-298-59-1556 (lab.)
> +81-298-59-1090(ULIS, Research Assistance Office)
> fax: +81-298-59-1093 email: [log in to unmask]
>