Upon reflection, I think I have to agree with Bob. As long as I've correctly identified my source (and I'd verify the Google citation with the actual t.p., just in case there's an error!) I suppose there's no reason to cite the access (via Google Books) any more than if I accessed the physical volume itself (walked to shelf; used microfilm reader...)
So I'll save myself a few keystrokes in the future.
Principal Rare Book Cataloger
[log in to unmask]
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging on behalf of Robert Maxwell
Sent: Fri 30/11/2007 1:50 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Google Books citation in authority records?
For the record, I'm in favor of not citing the access method (Google books), just as (I presume) we wouldn't cite the fact that we're using a microform instead of the original. I see a digitized copy as parallel, whether from Google Books or another source of a digitized book. I'd just as soon simply cite as though we have the book itself. I don't see that adding the access method adds anything significant. If the scan is bad, we might want to add something to cover ourselves, but this isn't usually the case.
Robert L. Maxwell
Special Collections and Ancient Languages Catalog Librarian
Genre/Form Authorities Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602