Friday, May 28, 2004
Dan Li |
Sourcing Blogs Properly
Original post can be found here: http://blog.lidan.net/archives/000135.html
In response to Steve Rubel's Petition to Commit to Proper Blog Sourcing (2004), I've been pondering what a standardized reference/sourcing style bloggers should come up with to gain full credit they deserve from journalists and other bloggers. Proper blog sourcing is pivotal to the integrity of blogosphere and would serve as backing for the creativity of bloggers. Due to the decentralization of blogosphere, we cannot rely on certain individual institution to sketch out codes of ethics for bloggers. We have to be on ourselves. Thus, several questions should be taken into account before we embark on the establishment of the new style.
Why We Need a Reference Style When We Blog
To maintain a reference is always a pain. You have to search for relevant information and read through to make sure you’ve included all the sources. The job is time-consuming but worth doing in that bloggers should be responsible for what s/he has written and cited. Blogging for personal hobbies/interests/uses does not justify any behaviors violating the principle of "Giving Credit where Credit is Due" (Basham, 2004). Whatever the intention s/he has to maintain a blog (serious writing or simply blah blah blah), it is the blogger's obligation to make sure readers can discern the original opinions from the derivative ones.
It is still under discussion in blogosphere and academia whether blogging is a form of journalism (Lasica, 2001). Whatever the conclusion would be, bloggers ought to treat blogging as seriously as journalists towards reports. Inexact and senseless information broadly disseminated on the Web has been a notable side effect of information overload. Sourcing precisely is a fundamental means of retaining accuracy and credibility of information on the Web. Citing others properly is a basic way to show respects to other’s intellectual efforts.
What Specific Reference Style Blogosphere Needs
Despite the existing guidelines specifically designed for electronic sources, the emergence of blog as a new form of online publication has posed new challenges for reference guidelines. The question is twofold indeed: how should bloggers cite and how should blogs be cited. It’s actually a reflection of blog writing behaviors and the characteristics of blogs as online publications.
To answer the first question “how should bloggers cite”, we should understand the way bloggers write. In a study of Weblogs As Genre aiming to present an overview of blogosphere (Sabrina, et al., 2003), a pattern is revealed that the majority of blogs are personal diaries. In general, contents of personal diaries are informal and descriptive—they concentrate on personal experiences or feelings thus lack references or derivation of other sources. It might seem overly exacting to require personal bloggers to maintain a through list of references about other works they mention in posts. The exaction definitely would kill the joy of blogging as a vent of self-expression thus should not be imposed on casual blogging. Indeed, a proper source is not compulsory in personal diaries but it would increase the credence and integrity of the blogger.
In my humble opinion, it’s essential to call for appropriate citation in those blogs working as knowledge bases, journalistic sites or other content providers. Having gone beyond the realm of self-disclosure and self-expression, this kind of blog should abide by certain rules to present unbiased and correct information to relatively broader audiences (compared with most personal blogs). Sourcing properly is one of the basic requirements they should meet to gain credence from audiences. It is also an effective approach to discourage plagiarism, eliminate irresponsible duplication of copyrighted information and promote creativity. To obtain more specific directions on citing online resources including web pages, emails, Listserv messages, etc., bloggers can refer to existing widely used reference styles such as MLA, APA, and Chicago for detailed information.
The second question “how should blogs be cited” has been confronted by journalists who have recognized blogs as sources of news and gradually regard bloggers as informants. Not only journalists but researchers and bloggers per se should think over the question in that they are supposed to cite blog entries reasonably. To locate the answer of the question, we could have a look at the current citation styles for other forms of online resources and think about what adaptation should be made to fit for blogs.
Based on a synthesis of citation components suggested by MLA style, APA style, Chicago Style, CBE style and other styles(Harnack & Kleppinger, 2003), I suggest a set of items listed to provide as much as information as possible when sourcing. Since the question is open to discussion yet, please feel free to make comments and critiques.
• Blogger's name
Try to attribute to blogger with real name. Otherwise pseudonym is acceptable.
• Title of blog
A blog can be regarded as an anthology of one blogger or multiple bloggers. It would serve as an identity for bloggers with pseudonym or nickname or anonyms as well.
• URL of blog
• Date of entry
It’s convenient to find out such information about certain entries on blogs.
• Title of entry
Each entry is supposed to contain a title. If not (very rarely but possible), present the permanent link as a substitute.
• Permanent link of entry
Remember to link to the permanent link unique to each entry. It is the best way to locate outdated entries in archives.
• Retrieval date
The preceding information can be seen as a repetition of extant citation components. The most interesting thing on sourcing blog is that the characteristics of blog determine the sourcing can be two-way. Feel free to trackback the entry you cite to inform the blogger and express your acknowledgement.
The unfortunate reality here, however, is that many bloggers themselves often neglect to properly credit other webloggers who break hard news through real reporting. How can we expect the press to source us if we neglect to credit the other members of our own community? Many journalists have a code ethics they must abide by. We don't.
In response to Steve Rubel's Petition to Commit to Proper Blog Sourcing (2004), I've been pondering what a standardized reference/sourcing style bloggers should come up with to gain full credit they deserve from journalists and other bloggers. Proper blog sourcing is pivotal to the integrity of blogosphere and would serve as backing for the creativity of bloggers. Due to the decentralization of blogosphere, we cannot rely on certain individual institution to sketch out codes of ethics for bloggers. We have to be on ourselves. Thus, several questions should be taken into account before we embark on the establishment of the new style.
Why We Need a Reference Style When We Blog
To maintain a reference is always a pain. You have to search for relevant information and read through to make sure you’ve included all the sources. The job is time-consuming but worth doing in that bloggers should be responsible for what s/he has written and cited. Blogging for personal hobbies/interests/uses does not justify any behaviors violating the principle of "Giving Credit where Credit is Due" (Basham, 2004). Whatever the intention s/he has to maintain a blog (serious writing or simply blah blah blah), it is the blogger's obligation to make sure readers can discern the original opinions from the derivative ones.
It is still under discussion in blogosphere and academia whether blogging is a form of journalism (Lasica, 2001). Whatever the conclusion would be, bloggers ought to treat blogging as seriously as journalists towards reports. Inexact and senseless information broadly disseminated on the Web has been a notable side effect of information overload. Sourcing precisely is a fundamental means of retaining accuracy and credibility of information on the Web. Citing others properly is a basic way to show respects to other’s intellectual efforts.
What Specific Reference Style Blogosphere Needs
Despite the existing guidelines specifically designed for electronic sources, the emergence of blog as a new form of online publication has posed new challenges for reference guidelines. The question is twofold indeed: how should bloggers cite and how should blogs be cited. It’s actually a reflection of blog writing behaviors and the characteristics of blogs as online publications.
To answer the first question “how should bloggers cite”, we should understand the way bloggers write. In a study of Weblogs As Genre aiming to present an overview of blogosphere (Sabrina, et al., 2003), a pattern is revealed that the majority of blogs are personal diaries. In general, contents of personal diaries are informal and descriptive—they concentrate on personal experiences or feelings thus lack references or derivation of other sources. It might seem overly exacting to require personal bloggers to maintain a through list of references about other works they mention in posts. The exaction definitely would kill the joy of blogging as a vent of self-expression thus should not be imposed on casual blogging. Indeed, a proper source is not compulsory in personal diaries but it would increase the credence and integrity of the blogger.
In my humble opinion, it’s essential to call for appropriate citation in those blogs working as knowledge bases, journalistic sites or other content providers. Having gone beyond the realm of self-disclosure and self-expression, this kind of blog should abide by certain rules to present unbiased and correct information to relatively broader audiences (compared with most personal blogs). Sourcing properly is one of the basic requirements they should meet to gain credence from audiences. It is also an effective approach to discourage plagiarism, eliminate irresponsible duplication of copyrighted information and promote creativity. To obtain more specific directions on citing online resources including web pages, emails, Listserv messages, etc., bloggers can refer to existing widely used reference styles such as MLA, APA, and Chicago for detailed information.
The second question “how should blogs be cited” has been confronted by journalists who have recognized blogs as sources of news and gradually regard bloggers as informants. Not only journalists but researchers and bloggers per se should think over the question in that they are supposed to cite blog entries reasonably. To locate the answer of the question, we could have a look at the current citation styles for other forms of online resources and think about what adaptation should be made to fit for blogs.
Based on a synthesis of citation components suggested by MLA style, APA style, Chicago Style, CBE style and other styles(Harnack & Kleppinger, 2003), I suggest a set of items listed to provide as much as information as possible when sourcing. Since the question is open to discussion yet, please feel free to make comments and critiques.
• Blogger's name
Try to attribute to blogger with real name. Otherwise pseudonym is acceptable.
• Title of blog
A blog can be regarded as an anthology of one blogger or multiple bloggers. It would serve as an identity for bloggers with pseudonym or nickname or anonyms as well.
• URL of blog
• Date of entry
It’s convenient to find out such information about certain entries on blogs.
• Title of entry
Each entry is supposed to contain a title. If not (very rarely but possible), present the permanent link as a substitute.
• Permanent link of entry
Remember to link to the permanent link unique to each entry. It is the best way to locate outdated entries in archives.
• Retrieval date
The preceding information can be seen as a repetition of extant citation components. The most interesting thing on sourcing blog is that the characteristics of blog determine the sourcing can be two-way. Feel free to trackback the entry you cite to inform the blogger and express your acknowledgement.
ls |
A new weblog for RSS users
Dave Winer created a new blog(web site) for RSS non-tech users. Winer has not only created and drove forward a new way to publish the web site as today's weblog. He also invented the ealry RSS and current RSS2.0. To know more about him and RSS, check "RSS 2.0 Specification" at Technology at Harvard Law.
Thursday, May 27, 2004
Owen |
Confusion of Free Culture Chinese name
As I saw some debates on a Free Culture review from Financial Times. The translator had translated "free Culture" to a Chinese name "免费文化". So I wrote an eamil to FT to clarify the Chinese name of "Free Culture". I'm looking forward their reply. Please see below.
Refer to the article: 免费世界堕入艰难时代
I read this article translate from Mr. 李功文. It makes me feel incomprehensibly because of Mr. Li's unacceptable translations! How could this happen to post this misunderstanding translation article in Financial Times! Free Culture not means "免费文化". From the book and the wide well-known concept, we all understand that "free Culture" meaning should be translated to "自由文化". There is a big difference between "自由文化" and "免费文化" in Chinese understanding.
We met Lawrence Lessig (author of "Free Culture") a month ago in "China Digital Future" conference in UC Berkeley; after his keynote speaking, we talk with Mr. Lessig in our Free Culture Translation Project organized by SocialBrain.org. Please see link on these pages, you will find a lot of well-understanding information about Free Culture.
Actually the book is under CreativeCommons license which is a new concept of copyright license. The book we could download from internet for non-commercial purpose only. The type of CreativeCommons license for this book could be found in free-culture.cc site. The publisher penguin group is a pioneer supporter of open copyright. We believe that publish this book in UK or not is concerted by publisher, not Author.
The purpose of writing this email is to clarify the "Free Culture" meaning and point out the misunderstanding translation. Financial Times is widely honored from world wide readers and Medias. As readers, we expect an accurate and particular translation in Chinese version. We know that translation is not only directly from word surface, but also contain in meaning and extend from background knowledge.
Thanks and hope to see your professional opinions.
Refer to the article: 免费世界堕入艰难时代
I read this article translate from Mr. 李功文. It makes me feel incomprehensibly because of Mr. Li's unacceptable translations! How could this happen to post this misunderstanding translation article in Financial Times! Free Culture not means "免费文化". From the book and the wide well-known concept, we all understand that "free Culture" meaning should be translated to "自由文化". There is a big difference between "自由文化" and "免费文化" in Chinese understanding.
We met Lawrence Lessig (author of "Free Culture") a month ago in "China Digital Future" conference in UC Berkeley; after his keynote speaking, we talk with Mr. Lessig in our Free Culture Translation Project organized by SocialBrain.org. Please see link on these pages, you will find a lot of well-understanding information about Free Culture.
Actually the book is under CreativeCommons license which is a new concept of copyright license. The book we could download from internet for non-commercial purpose only. The type of CreativeCommons license for this book could be found in free-culture.cc site. The publisher penguin group is a pioneer supporter of open copyright. We believe that publish this book in UK or not is concerted by publisher, not Author.
The purpose of writing this email is to clarify the "Free Culture" meaning and point out the misunderstanding translation. Financial Times is widely honored from world wide readers and Medias. As readers, we expect an accurate and particular translation in Chinese version. We know that translation is not only directly from word surface, but also contain in meaning and extend from background knowledge.
Thanks and hope to see your professional opinions.
Wednesday, May 26, 2004
|
Owen |
How Chinese Blogger use Movable Type
The original Post in my weblog.
Since Mena has post on Sixlog asking "How are you using the tool?" Tons of trackback pings answer this question. As I'm a Chinese Blogger, I'm going to answer this question in my point of view from Chinese Blogosphere.
A conservative estimate of more than 300,000 Bloggers exists in China. There are two main types of Bloggers which is the common Blogger and the devoted Blogger. Most of Blogger are common Blogger who are using Blog service to maintain their blogs. Devoted Bloggers are professionals who have technical backgrounds and prefer to build up blog by themselves. They use popular Blog publish systems such as MovableType and WordPrss. Also this group of Bloggers is the most active Bloggers in China. At least 3000 of Chinese Bloggers are using MT system to setup their own site.
So, how are they using the tool? I made myself for an Example. I hosting two major Blog site, one is English, the other one is Chinese. I setup a sidebar blog which I use to collect favorite links from internet (Since I realized that del.icio.us is even better, I removed my sidebar blog). There also two blogs I create in my MT, one is Photoblog and the other one is moblog (I had moved my moblog to TypePad already). The totally of 5 blogs I owned at first and two set of MT installed in different web hosting services point to different domain names. Some of my Blogger friends have the same situation like me to keep update two blog in different languages.
Averagely, there are three blogs were created in MT per Blogger. Include main blog, dairy blog and testing blog. It's very interesting because a lot of guys want to split their post to two blogs, one is for dairy that means more informal, the other one is more serious post to indicate a personal branding or foucs on some professional field. Most of Chinese Bloggers incline to invite their friends or families to join their blog world, that's Chinese culture means "keep open doors" for everybody. So that most likely the total of three blogs and 3 authors in average. It seems that MT3.0 free version is not filling their needs.
In addition, Web Hosting industry in China is not developed as good as in States. Lacking service providers with limited service function and control power, this is a barrier to restrict the MT getting more popular. That's why a lot of devoted Bloggers who had setup their own MT would like to provide individual blogs to their friends and families. Actually I had created some blogs to my close friends too.
In my recent Chinese post, I point out that the free MT service provider is a potential threat to the profit of Typepad hosted by SixApart. (I will translate this Analysis on the MT pricing strategy later). I'd think that is one of major concern for SixApart to change their market strategy. But if they use this kind of price to Chinese market, I'd conclude that SixApart will lose Chinese market. The basic personal edition for $69.95 is too high to Chinese users. I quoted Dave winner's post here:
In personal, I will totally support SixApart because of their great works and great people. I was very enjoyed to talk with Joi and Anil in Austin conference. But I also have to say that if MT keeps the price or even the Typepad Keeps the price to current Chinese Bloggers, absolutely they will lose a lot of loyal MT user in China.
Since Mena has post on Sixlog asking "How are you using the tool?" Tons of trackback pings answer this question. As I'm a Chinese Blogger, I'm going to answer this question in my point of view from Chinese Blogosphere.
A conservative estimate of more than 300,000 Bloggers exists in China. There are two main types of Bloggers which is the common Blogger and the devoted Blogger. Most of Blogger are common Blogger who are using Blog service to maintain their blogs. Devoted Bloggers are professionals who have technical backgrounds and prefer to build up blog by themselves. They use popular Blog publish systems such as MovableType and WordPrss. Also this group of Bloggers is the most active Bloggers in China. At least 3000 of Chinese Bloggers are using MT system to setup their own site.
So, how are they using the tool? I made myself for an Example. I hosting two major Blog site, one is English, the other one is Chinese. I setup a sidebar blog which I use to collect favorite links from internet (Since I realized that del.icio.us is even better, I removed my sidebar blog). There also two blogs I create in my MT, one is Photoblog and the other one is moblog (I had moved my moblog to TypePad already). The totally of 5 blogs I owned at first and two set of MT installed in different web hosting services point to different domain names. Some of my Blogger friends have the same situation like me to keep update two blog in different languages.
Averagely, there are three blogs were created in MT per Blogger. Include main blog, dairy blog and testing blog. It's very interesting because a lot of guys want to split their post to two blogs, one is for dairy that means more informal, the other one is more serious post to indicate a personal branding or foucs on some professional field. Most of Chinese Bloggers incline to invite their friends or families to join their blog world, that's Chinese culture means "keep open doors" for everybody. So that most likely the total of three blogs and 3 authors in average. It seems that MT3.0 free version is not filling their needs.
In addition, Web Hosting industry in China is not developed as good as in States. Lacking service providers with limited service function and control power, this is a barrier to restrict the MT getting more popular. That's why a lot of devoted Bloggers who had setup their own MT would like to provide individual blogs to their friends and families. Actually I had created some blogs to my close friends too.
In my recent Chinese post, I point out that the free MT service provider is a potential threat to the profit of Typepad hosted by SixApart. (I will translate this Analysis on the MT pricing strategy later). I'd think that is one of major concern for SixApart to change their market strategy. But if they use this kind of price to Chinese market, I'd conclude that SixApart will lose Chinese market. The basic personal edition for $69.95 is too high to Chinese users. I quoted Dave winner's post here:
Yesterday we saw people complain about spending $60 for a big useful piece of software like Movable Type. I paid $60 for a cab ride in Geneva. A good dinner is $100. A hotel room $150...I do agree this in US, but in China, $150 for a hotel room won't happen in normally. In some small town, $150 means one year of works.
In personal, I will totally support SixApart because of their great works and great people. I was very enjoyed to talk with Joi and Anil in Austin conference. But I also have to say that if MT keeps the price or even the Typepad Keeps the price to current Chinese Bloggers, absolutely they will lose a lot of loyal MT user in China.
Tuesday, May 25, 2004
yining |
A name is a name is a name
There have been some discussions on the choice of Chinese translation for "Weblog" or "blog". Clare has a summary about it, in which she mentioned the "lost of translation". Frankly I am somehow lost in the lost of translation ;-) So instead, let me write down my thoughts as I am trying to understand what my understanding is.
First of all, a name is a name.
If you and I agree that the color of the traffic light that STOPs the traffic is Green and the one RESUMEs the traffic is Yellow, then, at least in the context of our conversation on traffic lights and their function, we don't have a problem or ambiguity of what Green and Yellow mean.
Now comes the translation. Translation is a function of mapping a given piece of text in one language to a piece of text in another language, and this function usually takes a second parameter which is, no surprise, the context in which the translation function is performed (example: when I buy a optical mouse in a computer store, you wouldn't think I am spending money on a rat made of glass), and it's common that we presume the context in daily conversations.
An important property of a function is it always returns(if it does) one and only one result with a given input (we might get the same result with different inputs, but that's beside the point). In translation, it is that we have a semantically equivalent result for the given input (and the given context). A translation result might be in different forms, i.e. a combination of characters or a combination of words, but the semantics under the forms are the same.
The second point is now clear, it the semantics in a context gets translated that matters.
That's not the end of the story, the result of translation needs to be consumed by an audience. During this consumption, the translation gets projected into the audience's mind. That projection is a function which the translator has no control at all (well, one can use purposedly chosen words trying to manipulate audience's emotion so to adjust the projection, but that's outside the topic). It's mostly up to the audience's personal experience and knowledge of the subject to understand the meaning, the semantics.
So, in terms of translating a name from English to Chinese in a reasonably unambiguous context, we also need the audience to have some reasonable idea of what we are talking about.
Now get back to the translation of the word "weblog" or "blog", some bloggers strongly oppose a particular translation because the word chosen seems promoting a sense of eliteness, which is contrary to their belief in blogging and the culture they believe it truly represents.
Although I am on their side of this argument, but I don't really care what everybody chooses to translate, or whatever the translated word(s) the majority consent (if that happens) at the end of day.
Because I know what that whatever word means, because I know the semantics of that chosen word in the context of, eh, well, weblogging, because after the days of blogging and blog reading I have experienced, I know what(the technology, the practice, the spirit, the drive, the culture, the norm) that word refers to. So I have no problem.
I have NO problem with a name being a name.
What I really have problem with are, a blog site that does not have any single RSS feed and the only thing that is related (remotely if at all) to date is "Today in the history". What's the problem with that? The problem is such practice is misleading and confusing the public's understanding of the basic fundamentals of how blog works which undermines their further understanding of the truly great potential of blogging and potential wide spread of blogs.
Which one you have more problem with, this or the name?
First of all, a name is a name.
If you and I agree that the color of the traffic light that STOPs the traffic is Green and the one RESUMEs the traffic is Yellow, then, at least in the context of our conversation on traffic lights and their function, we don't have a problem or ambiguity of what Green and Yellow mean.
Now comes the translation. Translation is a function of mapping a given piece of text in one language to a piece of text in another language, and this function usually takes a second parameter which is, no surprise, the context in which the translation function is performed (example: when I buy a optical mouse in a computer store, you wouldn't think I am spending money on a rat made of glass), and it's common that we presume the context in daily conversations.
An important property of a function is it always returns(if it does) one and only one result with a given input (we might get the same result with different inputs, but that's beside the point). In translation, it is that we have a semantically equivalent result for the given input (and the given context). A translation result might be in different forms, i.e. a combination of characters or a combination of words, but the semantics under the forms are the same.
The second point is now clear, it the semantics in a context gets translated that matters.
That's not the end of the story, the result of translation needs to be consumed by an audience. During this consumption, the translation gets projected into the audience's mind. That projection is a function which the translator has no control at all (well, one can use purposedly chosen words trying to manipulate audience's emotion so to adjust the projection, but that's outside the topic). It's mostly up to the audience's personal experience and knowledge of the subject to understand the meaning, the semantics.
So, in terms of translating a name from English to Chinese in a reasonably unambiguous context, we also need the audience to have some reasonable idea of what we are talking about.
Now get back to the translation of the word "weblog" or "blog", some bloggers strongly oppose a particular translation because the word chosen seems promoting a sense of eliteness, which is contrary to their belief in blogging and the culture they believe it truly represents.
Although I am on their side of this argument, but I don't really care what everybody chooses to translate, or whatever the translated word(s) the majority consent (if that happens) at the end of day.
Because I know what that whatever word means, because I know the semantics of that chosen word in the context of, eh, well, weblogging, because after the days of blogging and blog reading I have experienced, I know what(the technology, the practice, the spirit, the drive, the culture, the norm) that word refers to. So I have no problem.
I have NO problem with a name being a name.
What I really have problem with are, a blog site that does not have any single RSS feed and the only thing that is related (remotely if at all) to date is "Today in the history". What's the problem with that? The problem is such practice is misleading and confusing the public's understanding of the basic fundamentals of how blog works which undermines their further understanding of the truly great potential of blogging and potential wide spread of blogs.
Which one you have more problem with, this or the name?
Sunday, May 23, 2004
jennylau |
Lost in translation
Topku wrote an interesting article called "Blog: How should I call you in Chinese?" (《Blog:你的中文名是什么?》) earlier today. I had some similar thoughts in the past since I started to use those weblog- related vocabularies such as "MovableType" (Web publishing system｜printing press technic), "CMS" or "trackback" in my articles which written in Chinese.
It is so difficult to avoid English terms appear in Chinese articles if you want to talk about some weblog issue in them. I even don't know how to mention "weblog" in Chinese that will allow all Chinese people from different regions to understand. Since I could not figure out a solution I leave these terms in their original appearance and let them hang around.
So, as you read above, I did not come up with any conclusion about the translation of weblog- vocabularies from English to Chinese. I'm expecting some sharing of experiences from all you guys. In certain degree I agree with what Topku said, that complete localization of terms or vocabularies is not necessary if it is difficult to handle it properly. Weblog archive already became a new form of written works that we need to study about.
It is so difficult to avoid English terms appear in Chinese articles if you want to talk about some weblog issue in them. I even don't know how to mention "weblog" in Chinese that will allow all Chinese people from different regions to understand. Since I could not figure out a solution I leave these terms in their original appearance and let them hang around.
So, as you read above, I did not come up with any conclusion about the translation of weblog- vocabularies from English to Chinese. I'm expecting some sharing of experiences from all you guys. In certain degree I agree with what Topku said, that complete localization of terms or vocabularies is not necessary if it is difficult to handle it properly. Weblog archive already became a new form of written works that we need to study about.
