A Rejection to ‘Natural Choice of Heading’ Theory

Abstract

In recent years, some catalogers appealed to the Japanese library technicians a reformation of cataloging practice—omission of heading for main entry from the unit card.
They except ‘Natural choice of heading’. Heading is only for filing merrit and description of book is immutable statement in the catalog. Then, they propose that main entry is entered under title, i.e. first item of description of book and may be added to heading, as they need to make author and other entries. Tittle main entry system seems to us more economical than traditional author main entry system, under the A. L. A. filing code 1942, not under the L. C. filing code 1956. This is truth, if we don't consider subject entry and consider author-title entry only.
They supply their theory, when make subject entries, under the same subject heading, the entries are field under the date of publication. And they account their successfulness, also, for the exclusion of hanging indention form of title entry.
The wtiter does'nt agree their reformation, why they have some misconceptions, or misinterpretations for main entry, heading, description of book, etc., as following.
　1. Omission of heading for main entry is equal making of title main entry system, though they don't believe so.
　2. Title main entry system is less economical in the cases of catalog system including official calalog and classified, or subject catalog. In these catalogs, we must select main entry. For instance, date of publication is no more identificial and rational than the main entry, under the same subject heading.
　3. Hanging indention form is no relation to the main entry system. We can make away of the form, under the traditional cataloging code, when we want.
Conclusion. —To the better cataloging practice, the writer points out that we must revised our cataloging code, NCR, without excluding main entry system.