Print

Print


When we cite a publication, if we have the resource physically, then that 
will be reflected in our catalog and in OCLC, so someone needing to see 
that resource later on will know where to go to find it.  If you cite 
something online that isn't cataloged, then without providing the 
information that you viewed it online could make it hard to find again 
later.  I think in a case where the original resource that's been scanned 
is not represented at all by a bibliographic record in OCLC (and this is 
certainly possible given that Google is scanning books in Europe and 
elsewhere), then it would be helpful to include the information that you 
viewed the book online through Google book search.  Otherwise, I think I 
agree with Bob Maxwell and others who say that the access method/format of 
the resource doesn't need to be cited in the 670.

Adam

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 543-8409
(206) 685-8782 fax
[log in to unmask]
http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Auyong, Dorothy wrote:

> 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.
>
> Dorothy Auyong
> Principal Rare Book Cataloger
> Huntington Library
> [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.
>
> Bob
>
> 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
> (801)422-5568
>