Re: aacr2

From: Suzanne Pilsk <suzanne.pilsk_at_nyob>
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 16:01:24 -0400
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
I second the concept of taking a gander at the hard copy... either the
fancy ringbinder or the old fashion paper back - to get a good feel
for the rules and structure. Then if there is a section that you want
to delve into you can target it better on the online version with the
wiz bang links to rule interpretations etc etc etc.

On 4/8/08, Naomi Young <amethystmenace_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> NOT ironic. Capitalist. The principal Anglophone library associations
> consider AACR their cash cow.
>
> Besides, I think it's not seen as a standard so much as an arcane
> religious and legal text. Such texts, guarded by their priesthoods,
> are seldome freely available, Gutenberg notwithstanding.
>
> Naomi
>
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Eric Lease Morgan <emorgan_at_nd.edu> wrote:
> >
> >  Ironic. The standard is not freely available.  :-(
> >
> >  --
> >  Eric Lease Morgan
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Naomi Young amethystmenace_at_gmail.com
>
> "Sleep -- a poor substitute for caffeine." --Paul Camarata
>
Received on Tue Apr 08 2008 - 14:43:40 EDT