Comment by ZeroGravitas
3 days ago
In FBRB translations are generally considered the same work.
In Openlibrary specifically they should be combined as one work. The editions can store the language and the translator info.
The current grouping is probably because semi-automatic (and some manual) merging is easier for titles in the same language.
I'm not sure I like merging translations together. They really make a difference, not like merging irrelevant things like paperback vs hardcover. A lot of classic literature from non-English originals (and I assume vice versa) suffers from old, dry translations -- I remember reading Dostoevsky in high school and not liking it much but that's because it was using translations from the early 20th century. More modern translations feel much more alive.
Their guidelines on what gets its own work, and what doesn't, are here:
https://openlibrary.org/help/faq/editing#works-special-cases
So an abridged or bowlderised or annotated or illustrated version are collected under the same work, even though people might have good reasons to want one over another (the language used and the specific translator being just two important attributes)
But summaries or adaptations or plays and screenplays are not.
There's always gray areas, but note the edition info isn't lost, it just lives in a subordinate position that is linked directly from the work.