3.616 device-independent markup, etc. (42)

Willard McCarty (MCCARTY@vm.epas.utoronto.ca)
Fri, 20 Oct 89 21:33:06 EDT

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 3, No. 616. Friday, 20 Oct 1989.

Date: Fri, 20 Oct 1989 07:26:25 IST
From: Ron Zweig <H27@TAUNIVM>
Subject: Oxford Archive Short List/Transliterating bibliographies

Grover Zinn's question on making use of the tagged version of the
Oxford Archive Shortlist invites us all to flaunt the advantages
of device-independent markup. Thanks to the tags, it is easy to
run a few search/replace commands to insert formatting codes that
are meaningful to our individual word processors, or DTP or database
programs plus our specific printers. As a result of the tags inserted
for us in Oxford, we can use the shortlist either as a file to be printed
or as part of a database. I am willing to convert it into a NotaBene
file for printing on a HP laser or an AskSam file if anyone prefers
to sort/retrieve the information in different ways. Is anyone else willing
to convert Oxford's SGML tags into something more ambitious - say, Ventura
tags, for some really sleak output?

On the question of multi-lingual bibliographies, more power to David
Birnbaum! Of all the possible solutions, the one advocated by the Chicago
Manual and senior professional colleagues is the most senseless.
Transliterated entries are meaningless to *both* those who know
the language and those that don't. *Translated* entries (with an
indication of original language) are still offensive to those that
know the language concerned, but at least allow those that dont to appreciate
what is available out there. Translating entries in a multi-lingual
bibliography also allows for one-pass search and retrieval of the items
in a database. But, as David Birnbaum rightly points out, the technology
is in place to allow for true multi-lingual publishing and there is
now reason to accept less than that now - and certainly not the
lame convention of transliterating non-Latin alphabets. I wonder if
the Chicago Manual ruling was established when the Chicago University Press
did not own any other alphabet typefaces.