Mention has been made of at least inputting death dates on NARs for
significant persons, Princess Diana being a named example. While I think
adding death dates is an important pursuit and surely a strategy that will
please--even if it doesn't further enable--catalog users, it seems to me
that we need to either do it for all or none at all. If Princess Di is
significant, then so is the former Bianca Jagger who also became famous more
for her associations and liasons than for any other reason. I mean no
disrespect to the late Princess, but I wish to point out that significance
is hardly an attribute that can easily be assessed with unanimity.

While we're on the subject of changing headings so the public will see what
they expect and want to see, do we have any sentiment for changing this
venerable heading:
Shaw, Bernard,$d1856-1950
to
Shaw, George Bernard,$d1856-1950?

The latter form is, after all, what most catalog users would probably expect
to find, were they looking up items related to GBS. Once we open the gates
to changing NARS to fit patrons' perceptions, how far are we willing to go?



Mike Tribby
Senior Cataloger
Quality Books Inc.
The Best of America's Independent Presses

mailto:[log in to unmask]