- From: Mats Blakstad <mats.gbproject@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2014 13:15:13 +0200
- To: "Wallis,Richard" <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>
- Cc: "<public-vocabs@w3.org>" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAP=1PAV9R5ZUZPu4J_BJ9GXXecswDUStqnNv9xxQhvAy0pQOxw@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 01 Sep 2014 10:01, Jean-Christophe Lavocat wrote: > Regarding an author/translator, one might want to know which "content" has been written by the person. Is there any official way to do that ? I guess it will only make sense to add a translator tag (or "translator role") to a text first defined as a translation. Author tag could then be added to any language version of the text and will then be the one that has written the original source text of that translation. I was not aware about the roles pattern used. To simply add "translator" as a contribution role to the work sounds very logical and would make it easier to manage for webmasters and to keep overview. However, the contribution from a translator to the work is in fact really significant for the person that needs the translation to understand the text. The issue is not about simply having a list of translators to give them attributions to a work, but to be able to display who translated a text together with the specific translation done. It serves an important function: Then if there are confusions in the text, you can actually contact the translator to clear up what you don't understand. The translator understand a language you don't, and you're in fact helpless to understand the original work without the translator. Maybe knowing the name of the translator would not make you buy a book, but would you buy the book at all if it was only written in a language you didn't understand? I think we can hardly underestimate the importance of the translator. A good translator understand a lot about the cultural context both of the source language/culture and the target language/culture, so there are many interpretations made for you by the translators that will be transmitted directly to your understanding of the work. To know who made the translation can say a lot about the quality of the translation. Culture and language is really not a 1-1 issue that can be translated word by word and different translators will often give different translations. Then of course the creative contribution from a translator to a translation can differ a lot; in a poem the translator needs to be more poetic and the translator will probably have a stronger voice in the text, in a legal text of course the translator will try to avoid having any voice themselves at all. On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 01:49, chaals@yandex-team.ru wrote: > I think the sticking point on translation is about the difference between identifying the thing translated and the translation, or between noting that there *is* a translation without specifying which is the original... Good point! But should this not be integrated with the way different language versions of a website is declared today? Usually a html document will declare all language versions of itself in the header with a link like this to each language version: <link rel="alternate" hreflang="LANGUAGE-CODE" href="LINK"> As far as I understand, there is nothing that indicate what is the original content (rel="canonical" only indicate that two different html pages have same content/translation). I guess adding something like *itemprop="hasTranslation"* or *itemprop="translationOf"* inside these link tags would help clarify what is the original version, but they would not be very human readable. What will *translationOf* mean inside the link tag in the header? That the html document is a translation of the link? Or that the link is a translation of the html document? *rel="alternate"* in fact already means an alternative version of the document, it can be different language version, but also a version with different style sheet (e.g. for people that need high contrast because of reduced sight). Maybe what we're actually missing is *rel="source"* or something similar, to indicate what (language) version is the original one? 2014-09-01 8:44 GMT+02:00 Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>: > There is not a translator property at the moment, I agree that one would > be useful along with translationOf/hasTranslation. > > These are on my list for potential proposals from the SchemaBibEx group. > > ~Richard > > On 31 Aug 2014, at 14:44, Mats Blakstad <mats.gbproject@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Does there exist in attribute for translator, like the author attribute? > > If not, would be great to add that! > > >
Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2014 11:15:42 UTC