COTERMINOUS OR SPECIFIC: A REJOINDER TO HEADINGS AND CANONS

The concept of cotermineity leads to conceptual (subject) surrogation that matches the document against the most relevant sector of the classification, and focuses it there as closely as possible. These ideas have as much place in normal (author/title) surrogation, despite the Canons of Ascertainability and of Permanence (Ranganathan). Alphabetical cataloguing is (or can be) as systematic as classified cataloguing, but only if such a principle as coter‐mineity is given sway there. Nominal surrogation is not best distinguished from analytical bibliography by such Canons, since these latter lean too much on transcription and too little on systematization, and since they assume that nominal surrogation deals with books rather than works.