>>> [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