Re: [RDA-L] Bibliography and index

[Gene Fieg]

I was a reader for RDA and I remember reading the example you cite.

LC used "Includes bibliographical references to cover all types of
citations.  I remember when I asked a cataloger back in the 80s about using
the term "bibliography" for endnotes; to my mind then they were not
bibliographies.

We do include the pagination of bibliographical references to give
researchers an idea of how many citations there are and how profitable it
would be for them to to look at those bibliographical references.

On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 10:44 AM, J. McRee Elrod <m...@slc.bc.ca> wrote:

> RDA 7.16.1.1 (earlier draft) shows the examples:
>
> Includes index.
> Bibliography: pages 859-910.
>
> There is no indication of wording to use for footnotes, still "Includes
> bibliographic references"?
>
> Will most of us be willing to give up the handy:
>
> 504  $aIncludes bibliograhic references (p. 859-910) and index.?
>
> But isn't that an LC practice as opposed to AACR2?  Will they continue
> that practice?
>
> Doesn't spelling out pages here depart from practice for citations in the
> scholarly community?
>
> This would presumably return "Includes index" to 500?
>
>
>   __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
>  {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   
> HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/<http://www.slc.bc.ca/>
>  ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
>



-- 
Gene Fieg
Cataloger/Serials Librarian
Claremont School of Theology
gf...@cst.edu