I like the structure, and presumably you'd throw in the dates when that
position applied -- and then we could also extend that structure to
other corporate names (adding dates that apply for the changes to name)
and to "works" (uniform titles) for things like serials that change
titles over time - just add the dates when the title applies, etc.  -
would help solve a lot of the cataloging rule dilemmas about
earliest/latest/successive entry - just use authority records (I'll be
speaking about this at ALA). - Barbara

Dr. Barbara B. Tillett, Ph.D.
Chief, Cataloging Policy and Support Office
Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave., S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20540-4134

tel.: +1 (202) 707-4714
fax: +1 (202) 707-6629
email: [log in to unmask]

>>> [log in to unmask] 1/4/2005 8:30:35 AM >>>
On Jan 3, 2005, at 5:44 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:

> Regardless of whether you think our name practices are insane (and I
> would not want
> to have to defend them), the fact is that MADS will need to
> them.

I guess the question becomes how.  I just don't see how MADS can hope
to be coherent if you don't set some ground rules.

If I see the below, I would assume coding this stuff -- positions
within various governments -- in separate structures; something like:

> Search Also Under:  Arkansas. Governor (1979-1981 : Clinton)
>                     Arkansas. Governor (1983-1992 : Clinton)
>                     United States. President (1993-2001 : Clinton)

<mads xmlns="">
       <variant type="alternate">