True, this seems to be the most honest way. However, if I see the citation: Darwin (1997), it looks a bit strange, like Darwin's still alive and publishing . On the othe hand, if I see Darwin (1859), I now it's "The Origin of Species", so I won't even have to look at the bibliography.
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 12:25 AM, Rich Shepard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 28 Aug 2008, killermike wrote: > >> This is something I have have often wondered about too. For example, if >> you have a book that was written in 1600 but your copy is a 1976 >> paperback, what do you put for the date? > > I would use "<author>. 1976. <title>. <publisher>. Reprint of original 1600 > manuscript." That's accurate and fully discloses all information. > > Rich > > -- > Richard B. Shepard, Ph.D. | Integrity Credibility > Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc. | Innovation > <http://www.appl-ecosys.com> Voice: 503-667-4517 Fax: 503-667-8863 >
