Adam said gave example:
> Published in London, Ont.
> (Place of publication as transcribed from source: London)
So abbreviation in notes, but not in transcribed areas?
"260$aLondon [Ont.]" is far more helpful to patrons, most of whom
never get to the notes. It is also a language neutral solution for
the bilingual libraries we serve.
What is the thought behind this? Hoping to automatically harvest the
material in transcribed elements without human intervention?
I suspect those notes will be as hit and miss as is the present
transcription or supplying of jurisdiction in imprint.
While I appreciate your point that imprint key word search is
different from a a structured key like 752, or coded information in
008/15-17 (which does not include actual city), some consistency in
transcribing and supplying jurisdiction would be much less labour
intensive than the propoed notes, as well as being more likely to be
understood and utilized by patrons.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
