Yale University Library Catalog Department
Local Headings Task Group Report


Introduction  Collection tracings  Imprint tracings   Subject tracing of non-subject names  Chronology tracings  Non-standard subject headings  Form/genre headings  Hybrid headings

Chronology tracings

Two types of non-standard chronology tracings have been identified as being in use at Yale. The first type was developed
to retrieve items in a collection solely in terms of their chronology. The second type is a non-standard chronological
subdivision to a standard subject tracing. We consider it desirable in the interests of consistency and coherence to use the
same method for both chronology tracings.
 

1a. Collection chronology tracing (BAC)

Uses the word 'Chron.' in field 650:4 (Subject added entry--topical term; source not specified) with a chronological
subdivision for the year published.
 
Present practice 650:4: Chron. |y [date].
Example 650:4: Chron. |y 1785.
Advantages
  • In current use
  • Can be retrieved with subject and keyword searches
Disadvantages
  • Not a topical subject--does not conform to defined contents of field 650
  • Not readily identifiable as a local tracing
  • Derived into other libraries' cataloging copy through the utilities
  • Conflicts with form of chronology tracing used by the Divinity Library
Authority control implications Field 650:4 not subjected to automated authority control processing
Alternative: Uses field 695:04 (Local subject added entry—uniform title; source not specified) with current data construction. Although chronology data are not typical uniform titles, they are more like uniform titles than they are like other local subject added entry tracings, such as topical subject headings.
 
Alternative 695:04: Chron. |y [date].
Example 695:04: Chron. |y 1785.
Advantages
  • Readily identifiable as a local tracing
  • Can be retrieved by subject and keyword searches
  • Not derived into other libraries' cataloging copy through the utilities
  • Would require only minimal change to current practice
Disadvantages
  • Neither a subject nor a uniform title--does not conform to defined contents of field 695
  • Conflicts with form of chronology tracing used by the Divinity Library
  • Would require change to current practice
Authority control implications Field 695 not subjected to automated authority control processing 
 

1b. Collection chronology tracing (Divinity)

Uses the word 'chr' followed by the year of publication with no subfield subdivision in field 630 (subject added
entry--uniform title).
 
Present practice 630:04: chr [date]
Example 630:04: chr 1782
Advantages
  • In current use 
  • Can be retrieved with subject and keyword searches
Disadvantages
  • Neither a subject nor a uniform title--does not conform to defined contents of field 630
  • Not readily identifiable as a local tracing
  • Derived into other libraries' cataloging copy through the utilities
  • Conflicts with form of chronology tracing used by the BAC
Authority control implications Field 630:4 not subjected to automated authority control processing
 

Alternative: Uses field 695:04 (Local subject added entry--uniform title; source not specified) with current data
construction.

 
Alternative 695:04: chr [date]
Example 695:04: chr 1782
Advantages
  • Readily identifiable as a local tracing
  • Can be retrieved by subject and keyword searches
  • Not derived into other libraries' cataloging copy through the utilities
  • Would require only minimal change in current practice
Disadvantages
  • Neither a subject nor a uniform title--does not conform to defined contents of field 695
  • Conflicts with form of chronology tracing used by the BAC
  • Would require change in current practice
Authority control implications Field 695 not subjected to automated authority control processing
 
 

2. Chronological addition to standard subject tracing (RBT)
 
Present practice 610:14: United States. |b Congress. |y [year mm dd]
Example 610:14: United States. |b Congress. |y 1796 06 25.
Advantages
  • In current use
  • Can be retrieved with subject and keyword searches
Disadvantages
  • Not a standard chronological subdivision
  • Not readily identifiable as a local tracing
  • Derived into other libraries' cataloging copy through the utilities
Authority control implications Field 610:14 is not subjected to automated authority control processing
 

Alternative: Uses field 693:14 (Local subject added entry--corporate name; source not specified) with current data
construction. Note: if this alternative is used, the standard subject heading should also be used in the 610 if appropriate.
 
Alternative  693:14: United States. |b Congress. |y [year mm dd].
Example 693:14: United States. |b Congress. |y 1796 06 25.
Advantages
  • Readily identifiable as a local tracing
  • Can be retrieved by subject and keyword searches
  • Not derived into other libraries' cataloging copy through the utilities
  • Would require only minimal change in current practice
Disadvantages
  • Not a standard chronological subdivision
  • Would require change in current practice
Authority control implications Field 693 not subjected to automated authority control processing
 

 Back to top  Forward to Non-standard subject headings  Back to Subject tracing of non-subject names



 
Prepared by DJ Leslie on 19 January 1998
For comment, reply to Deborah J. Leslie
deborah.leslie@yale.edu
(203) 432-8377
(203) 432-7231 (fax)
Rare Book Catalog Librarian
Sterling Memorial Library
Yale University
PO Box 208240
New Haven, CT 06520-8240
http://www.library.yale.edu/cataloging/admin/chronology.htm