Date:         Sat, 30 Oct 2004 16:47:01 -0400
Reply-To:     Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Andrew E Switala <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: High Quality XSLT Stylesheets
Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline

>>> [log in to unmask] 2004-10-30 13:03:27 >>>
[snip]
> Again, I want the data elements to carry the correct data, and
> "ogodwhoknows" is a valid data element in my universe.
    Ah, right.  I use <note type="admin"> in my MODS records as a
catch-all to indicate something that needs attention from the database
admin.  Every once in a while a run XSLT to extract these notes and see
what issues are outstanding.

> There isn't any coding that I know of for et al, because it only
makes
> sense when you have a list of authors, not individual authors. It
means
> "this list continues, but we didn't write all of the names in our
> metadata." Unlike "anonymous", which replaces a single author, et al
> doesn't stand alone. When I was doing transformations of citations
for
> the University of California library systems, we created a special
case
> author for et al.
    Hm, so maybe a record with <name type="corporate"> representing an
anonymous group of contributors.
    Like Bruce, I'd record all the authors if possible, even 100, since
MODS has no limit on the size of a record.  I was thinking more along
the lines of a direct quote from Smith et al. appearing in Jones et al.,
when all I have before me is the latter and the original appeared in an
obscure journal in 1930 that my library doesn't have.  The special
coding would be a temporary measure, until the full data became
available.

--Andy