Karen posted:

>e.g. Paris : Gauthier-Villars; Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1955.

As I keep saying, our European and/or Asian clients would want
[France] after Paris, and [Illinois] after Chicago.  Our North
American cleints want jurisdction for some cities for which Australian
and DLC records lack jurisdiction.  A city known in Canberra or the
Beltway may not be known in Canada.  Isn't it time, since we are no
longer limited by what we can get on a card, to leave our Anglo silo?  

It seems to me, the move to Bibframe would be a time to standardize
representation of place.

As was said in the early days of automation, "garbage in, garbage
out".  Isn't it time we were more consistent in what we are coding, as
opposed to feeding in truncated unit card type data?

In Bibframe, the labels are sometimes longer than the data being

   __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
  {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://
  ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________