t, den ich 
ssion ein. 
«annt 7 
darf den 
chermer- 
kann ich 
ührungen 
  
n meiner 
hnen, die | 
logie auf 
sage das | 
ladieren, | 
fgabe zur | 
von uns 
llen Auf- | 
haft für | 
geeignet- 
darf nur 
el, Baby- 
den ver- 
gefunden 
1enhängt, 
che, son- 
noch die | 
| hinzu 
machen, 
ges Jubi- | 
nationale 
  
len. Vor 
her Kon- 
ein Aus- | 
'eichnun- | 
Das hat 
ligermas- 
Jarf dem 
. die fünf 
mals be- 
;, nur die 
hier wird | 
er liegen. | 
is, Uber- | 
ttens un- | 
u benut- | 
. werden. 
iregelung 
cht mehr 
mmenzu- 
lichst die | 
ihlt wer- 
mblattes, 
Arbeiten 
satz ent- 
der ver- 
iche von 
  
DISCUSSION ON SELECTION OF PHOTOGRAMMETRIC TERMS 79 
Fall zu Fall ausgeglichen werden müssten. Ich 
möchte also damit meine kurze Ergänzung 
mit der Feststellung beenden, dass allein schon 
aus sprachlich-sachlichen Gründen viele Wider- 
sprüche zu beseitigen sind, und ich móchte doch 
kapitulieren vor der Aufgabe, ausser diesen 
Schwierigkeiten auch noch internationale 
Schwierigkeiten zu beseitigen. 
Herr Professor BARVIR: Ich danke Herrn 
Professor Burkhardt für seine Überlegungen 
und frage, ob jemand von den Teilnehmern dazu 
sprechen will, zur Terminologie. — Ich sehe Mr 
Fagerholm. May I ask you. 
Mr P. O. FAGERHOLM: I do not think any- 
one believes that it would be possible to find a 
common language or to find the same words 
which could be used in the different languages 
in photogrammetric literature and so on. On 
the other hand, we must perhaps discuss how to 
choose those words which we have to define. 
Personally, I feel that we should try to limit 
them far more than Prof Schermerhorn men- 
tioned, I would say that one should have much 
less than 1,000 words. I do not think that the 
best way is to go in the dictionary and pick out 
some words, because that is just a revision of 
certain parts of the dictionary. I think one 
should study it logically and take out from each 
part of photogrammetry the expressions which 
are important for building up that part of photo- 
grammetry, and to get definitions on those. I 
do not think that the new Commission VI 
should just send out a list of words. I think it 
should be something more than that, because if 
just a list is sent out one country will follow one 
way of defining them, perhaps referring to the 
dictionary, and maybe another country will 
write a book on them, so I think we should try 
to standardise the terminology, not the terms in 
the terminology. 
That is perhaps a minor question, but I be- 
lieve it is essential to have that work in very 
strict and limited lines from the beginning, to 
keep it on such a level and to such limited size 
that we will be happy to present it to ourselves 
in the not too distant future. Later on we can 
extend the number of terms which shall be clear- 
ly defined in the various languages. We can 
start with the very essential words and build it 
up later on. That is my proposal. 
Prof W. SCHERMERHORN: Which way you 
make the choice is another point. I can give you 
an example. After the Congress in Zurich in 
1930 the Netherlands Society — I have not 
mentioned it before — started a booklet with the 
definitions of a great number of expressions 
which already exist. The authors of this with the 
help of a few others have made a choice of ex- 
pressions using a text book, taking all words, 
expressions and definitions; they found in such 
text books, also using the then existing German 
multi-lingual dictionary, a number of words. I 
do not know how many there are, 1,000 or 500 
maybe, I have not the slightest idea, but I sup- 
pose it is nearer a thousand than five hundred. 
How they selected them is another point. 
I heard one word from Mr Fagerholm which 
I do not like, and that is standardisation. In this 
respect you can only give certain instructions as 
to which way they have to understand a defini- 
tion, so that then it is not half a page of a book; 
otherwise I would say leave it free to the various 
countries. They may have a different meaning 
for similar words and it is necessary to know 
that, but do not try to standardise. Perhaps we 
should give instructions, but whether or not you 
check the list in a wider group of Commission 
VI is another point. I agree fully with you to do 
this, to make a check and leave the coming 
board of Commission VI free to find out which 
words they would like to have in the various 
languages in a proper definition. 
The PRESIDENT: Are there any other prop- 
ositions? 
Professeur F. RUELLAN: Je pense qu'en 
matière de dictionnaire on ne peut procéder qu'à 
partir des textes vivants. Or, quels sont les 
textes vivants en photogrammétrie? Ce sont les 
publications courantes, et par conséquent il 
faut puiser dans ces publications courantes les 
sens actuels des mots qu’on y rencontre et har- 
moniser à l’intérieur de chaque comité national 
les significations de ces mots ou de ces expres- 
sions, et ensuite comparer à ce qu’on fait dans 
d’autres pays. Il ne serait pas, à mon avis, 
raisonnable du point du vue scientifique, de 
vouloir trop uniformiser — je suis tout à fait du 
même avis que Monsieur Schermerhorn, car on 
peut trouver des auteurs qui donnent un sens 
différent ou légèrement différent à une chose 
qu’ils ont eux-mêmes définie après tout, et dont 
ils se sont servis d’une façon courante — et un 
dictionnaire utile ne peut l’être qu’à condition de 
servir à lire et à comprendre les ouvrages en 
langue étrangère. Qu’on essaie d’uniformiser 
c’est très bien, mais je crois qu’il faut qu’un 
pareil lexique soit extrêmement vivant, c’est à 
dire qu’il soit exactement au courant des der- 
nières expressions employées dans les dernières 
publications.