The ANSI standard for serials holding statements defines chronolgy as "The
different types of dates used by the publisher on the work to IDENTIFY [my
emphasis] the INDIVIDUAL [my emphasis]  bibliographic unit of a serial (for
example, date of coverage, date of publication, date of printing, or date of
reprinting)."

   In the case of numbered monographic series, the publisher uses the
enumeration alone to identify the individual bibliographic units in the
monographic series.  Dates (copyright, printing, and reprinting) generally do
NOT identify the individual bibliographic units of a numbered monographic
series (for example, several numbers of a monographic series all bearing the
same copyright date).

   Question: When union listing numbered monographic series, should only
enumeration be used?

   In 1983, the Indiana Cooperative Library Services Authority (INCOLSA)
network in its "INCOLSA/OCLC Serials Control Newletter," No. 2, Feb. 7, 1983,
wrote in a response to this question from an Indiana library, "INCOLSA staff
contacted Mary Sauer Price, LC and member of the Drafting Committee for the
Standard, for guidance on usage of dates (publication, printing, or reprinting)
in union listing for numbered monographic series.  Ms. Price concurred that
dates on numbered monographic series are not generally used for identification
purposes.  She recommended that union listing for numbered monographic series
include the ENUMERATION ONLY."

   With the implemention of PRISM Union Listing on OCLC August 29th, and the
implementation of ANSI Z39.44-1986, does this interpretation of the Standard
still hold true?  OCLC's PRISM Service "Union List User Guide," 7.15-7.48, does
not address this issue specifically, but the assumption seems to be that dates
should be used.  There appears to be a discrepancy!  How are other libraries
union listing numbered monographic series?

Doug Conrads
Indiana State Library
Serials Section
e-mail: dconrads@statelib.lib.in.us
voice: (317) 232-3686
fax: (317) 232-3728