025.431: The Dewey blog

Le Tour de France

On Sunday Spain’s Carlos Sastre won the Tour de France.  Australia’s Cadel Evans came in second for the second time.  Austria’s Bernhard Kohl came in third.  For details, see the Tour de France standings page.

Works about the Tour de France are classed in 796.620944 Bicycle racing in France (built with 796.62 Bicycle racing plus T1—09 Historical and geographic treatment plus T2—44 France, following instructions at T1—093-T1—099 Treatment by specific continents, countries, localities; extraterrestrial worlds), e.g., Le Tour: A History of the Tour de France, 1903-2003 and Tour Fever: The Armchair Cyclist's Guide to the Tour de France.  Notation T2—44 France is appropriate because (1) the Tour covers a wide area of France and (2) it is always located predominantly in France, even though it typically goes briefly outside of France (this year to Italy).

LCSH-DDC Mapping Hiatus

We have temporarily suspended our biweekly LCSH-DDC mappings to make room for a project to add DDC numbers to the authority records for BISAC (Book Industry Standards and Communications) subject headings (we’ll have more to say about this project in a month or so).  We plan to resume LCSH-DDC mappings in early 2009.

What is Knowledge Organization?

A special double issue of Knowledge Organization devoted to the question “What is Knowledge Organization?” has just been published as v. 35, nos. 2/3, of the journal—I co-edited it with Ia McIlwaine (former editor in chief of the Universal Decimal Classification [UDC]).  Six internationally known researchers contributed to the special issue, including our own Rebecca Green.  Topics addressed include the nature of the field of KO; epistemology, theory, and methodology in KO; relationships in KO; short- and long-term KO research questions; and KO systems.  The issue also features an interview with Ingetraut Dahlberg, founder of the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO) and the journal Knowledge Organization.  The table of contents and preface are available here.

ISKO will hold its 10th International Conference, “Culture and Identity in Knowledge Organization,” 5-8 August 2008, at the Université de Montréal.  Immediately preceding the conference in the same venue on 5 August, ISKO NA (the North American chapter of ISKO) and OCLC are co-sponsoring a workshop on terminologies, “Everything Need Not Be Miscellaneous: Controlled Vocabularies and Classification in a Web World.”  The detailed agenda for both meetings is available here.

Postscript: Janus views must be the rage this week—it has come to our attention that the Journal of Information Science has just published a special issue on the history of information science in the UK (v. 34, no.4).

Computational Linguistics

Ever have difficulty deciding whether material should be classed in 006.35 Natural language processing or in 410.285 Computational linguistics? (It would seem so, since many works have been classed in both numbers.) Since we have also found it difficult to distinguish clearly between the two numbers, we decided to take advantage of a recent major gathering of computational linguists at ACL-08: HLT (ACL = Association of Computational Linguistics; HLT = Human Language Technology) to get their feedback on the treatment of computational linguistics and natural language processing in the DDC.

According to LCSH, the intended distinction between computational linguistics and natural language processing is that Computational linguistics (LCC: P98-98.5; DDC: 410.285; 467 WorldCat records) is for “works on the application of computers in processing and analyzing language,” whereas Natural language processing (Computer science) (LCC: QA76.9.N38; DDC: 006.35; 365 WorldCat records) is for “works on the computer processing of natural language for the purpose of enabling humans to interact with computers in natural language.” Dewey currently adopts this same distinction. The distinction, however, does not reflect current thought.

Computational linguists at ACL-08 tended to agree that “natural language processing” (NLP) and “computational linguistics” (CL) mean pretty much the same thing (or, if different, that the meaning of natural language processing is encompassed within the meaning of computational linguistics). That makes our decision to merge natural language processing and computational linguistics relatively easy.

Deciding where the merged subject should go is much harder. On the one hand, there was agreement that the relative contribution of computer science to computational linguistics is greater than the contribution of linguistics. Similarly, there was agreement that a background in computer science is more essential for computational linguistics than a background in linguistics. Further, computer scientists are much more likely than linguists to embrace computational linguistics as part of their field. From these statements, classing the merged natural language processing / computational linguistics in 006 might seem a no-brainer. On the other hand, however, some of the observations shared suggest that the situation may not be so cut-and-dry: Computational linguistics really belongs in linguistics, but linguists don’t realize it yet. Computer scientists sometimes change the field they apply their skills to (that is, a junior computational linguist might not continue to work in computational linguistics). As a supervisor, you get better results teaching computer science to a linguist than teaching linguistics to a computer scientist.

There are at least two distinctions made in computational linguistics that should inform our decision. The first is a distinction between symbolic and statistical approaches to computational linguistics, the former emphasizing linguistics-based representations of natural language, the latter emphasizing quantitative representations of natural language. Many symbolic approaches could be classed comfortably within linguistics; however, the same could be said of statistical approaches considerably less often.

A second distinction is made in computational linguistics between tasks and applications: Computational linguistics tasks (e.g., part-of-speech tagging, parsing, word sense disambiguation, text segmentation) rely, wholly or in part, on specific properties of language in their processing and analysis and may be combined to form applications of extrinsic value; computational linguistics applications (e.g., question answering, information retrieval, automatic abstracting, machine translation) are comprised of components addressing multiple linguistic properties and are of extrinsic value. Again, one end of our spectrum (in this case, tasks) is much more like linguistics than the other (in this case, applications—unless the application is itself in linguistics, e.g., translation), but all applications carry out some number of tasks.

It appears to us that the best solution would be to drop the distinction between natural language processing and computational linguistics by relocating comprehensive and interdisciplinary works on computational linguistics from 410.285 to 006.35. We would continue to use 410.285 in its broad meaning as computer applications in linguistics; for example, the SIL (initially known as the Summer Institute of Linguistics) software catalog, which supports the work of field linguists, would be classed in 410.28553. This catalog includes, inter alia, fonts, a concordance generator, a tool for drawing syntax trees, interlinear text editors, a Spanish verb conjugator, and a program for learning the International Phonetic Alphabet.

We would love to hear your reactions to this solution. (Or if you have another solution that accounts for the interdisciplinary nature of computational linguistics, we would love to hear that, too.) For best consideration, please either comment on this blog or send email to dewey@loc.gov  by August 15.

Dewey: The Organization Side

Michael Panzer wrote about “Relationships, spaces, and the two faces of Dewey” yesterday on Metalogue, a blog hosted by Karen Calhoun.  Michael's piece expands on the topics he addressed in his talk at the Dewey Breakfast/Update at ALA Annual 2008 with a focus on the discovery side of Dewey.

The Dewey editorial team spends most of its time focused on the development of the DDC (the "organization side") to enable use of the system for discovery. About a year ago, I wrote about how frequently we update the DDC and where those updates appear.  In upcoming posts, we’ll discuss how statistics from WorldCat and suggestions/feedback from Dewey users around the world feed into the development process.  (We have a request out right now for user feedback on the treatment of literary periods for writers who write under more than one name.)   Regular readers of this blog already know the critical role the Decimal Classification Editorial Policy Committee (EPC), our ten-member international advisory board, plays in advising us on development of the DDC.  EPC just completed electronic Meeting 129A to resolve some minor open issues arising from Meeting 129.  Last Friday, we sent the first electronic mailing to EPC for topics under consideration at Meeting 130, to be held at the Library of Congress November 18-19, 2008.  The agenda for Meeting 130 has just been posted on the Dewey web site.

Autism and Genes

Genetic aspects of autism have been in the news this year, e.g., “Common Mechanisms May Underlie Autism's Seemingly Diverse Mutations: Study Implicates Disruption of Genes Regulated by Early Experience” (original article “Identifying Autism Loci and Genes by Tracing Recent Shared Ancestry” in Science) and “Rare Genetic Glitch Hikes Risk of Autism” (original article “A Hot Spot of Genetic Instability in Autism” in New England Journal of Medicine).

Works that focus on genes as a possible or partial cause of autism are classed in 616.85882042 Genetic aspects of autism (built with 616.85882 Autism plus 042 Genetic diseases from the add table under 616.1-616.9 Specific diseases, following instructions at 616.1-616.9; at 042 Genetic diseases is the note: “Class here genetic aspects of diseases with complex causation, medical genetics”).  An example of a work classed in 616.85882042 Genetic aspects of autism is Autism Susceptibility Genes: Analysis of Candidate Genes at the AUTS1 Locus on Chromosome 7q.

Comprehensive works on possible causes of autism are classed in 616.85882071 Etiology of autism (built with 616.85882 Autism plus 071 Etiology from the add table under 616.1-616.9 Specific diseases, following instructions at 616.1-616.9), e.g., Potential Causes of Autism Spectrum Disorders.

Just above the add table at 616.1-616.9 Specific diseases is the note:  “All notes under 616.02-616.08 are applicable here.”  Consequently, the note under 616.071 Etiology leading to 616.042 Genetic diseases —“Class genetic diseases, genetic aspects of diseases with complex causation in 616.042”—is relevant to the choice between 071 Etiology and 042 Genetic diseases in the add table at 616.1-616.9 Specific diseases.  (Notes are provided in the add table to highlight the relationships among add table notation, to provide additional instructions, or to overrule the instructions found under 616.02-616.08.)

Pseudonyms and Literary Periods

The Manual entry at the start of Table 3A Subdivisions for Works by or about Individual Authors, which gives much advice about choice of numbers for individual literary authors, says nothing about pseudonyms.  In particular, the discussion of literary periods says nothing about pseudonyms.  Here is an excerpt from what the Manual entry says about choice of literary period:

Use only one literary period for an author and all of the author's works, including works that may have been published earlier or later than the dates covered by that period. Determine the literary period in accordance with scholarly consensus about when an author flourished. . . . In the absence of scholarly comment, use the weight of bibliographic evidence to determine when an author flourished. For example, class an author who published one novel in 1999, one novel in 2000, one in 2001, and one in 2002 in the literary period beginning with 2000.

The Decimal Classification Division of the Library of Congress (LC) decided that an author who chose to establish a new literary identity with a new pseudonym in the 21st century should have the new literary period notation assigned to that new pseudonym.  For example, consider the literary identity of Lauren Kelly, an American writer of “novels of suspense.”  Her publication timeline begins in 2004.  The Decimal Classification Division has given her fiction the DDC number 813.6 American fiction—2000–    .  A look at the LC authority record for Kelly shows that Kelly is a pseudonym for Joyce Carol Oates: “Works by this author are entered under the name used in the item. For a listing of other names used by this author, search also under Oates, Joyce Carol, 1938–    .” 

The publication timeline for Joyce Carol Oates begins in 1963.  Oates has written many kinds of fiction, including domestic fiction, love stories, bildungsromans, historical fiction, horror fiction, romans à clef, and biographical fiction, as well as suspense fiction.  The Decimal Classification Division has given her fiction the DDC number 813.54 American fiction—1945–1999.  A look at the LC authority record for Oates shows that she published under several pseudonyms: “For works of this author entered under other names, search also under Fernandes, 1938–     ; Smith, Rosamond, 1938–     ; Kelly, Lauren, 1938–    .”

We are reconsidering the policy of using a new literary period notation for new pseudonyms.  Some have argued that everything by the same real author should be classed in the same literary period.  Others have noted that sometimes a work originally published under a pseudonym is later republished under the author’s real name.

We should point out that if the same DDC number is preferred for all names used by the same author, each library can make its own decision about what Cutter number or book number to use:  alphabetic arrangement is a local issue with DDC.  For example, if DDC number 813.54 American fiction—1945–1999 is used for all fiction by Oates under all her names, some libraries may choose to assign a Cutter number for a work by Kelly based on “Kelly” instead of “Oates.”

We are asking for advice.  Should we treat pseudonyms as separate literary identities and assign literary period notation according to when the pseudonym began to flourish?  Or should we assign the same literary period notation to all the names under which an author publishes?  Please reply directly to this blog entry by August 15, 2008.  If you prefer, you may also send comments and suggestions directly to dewey@loc.gov.

Dewey Breakfast/Update at ALA Annual 2008

Several presentations from the Dewey Breakfast/Update at the American Library Association (ALA) Annual Conference on June 28, 2008, are now up on the Dewey web site. My presentation on groups of people is a preview of the major changes to the treatment of groups of people across the DDC plus our proposed timetable for introduction of the changes. We've discussed these changes in many past entries, most recently in the report on EPC Meeting 129 last month. We expect to post the draft versions of Table 1 —08–09 and 305–306 for final user comment in early August. Juli Beall discussed literary periods—you'll be hearing more from her later this week on one aspect of her presentation, the treatment of literary periods for writers who write under more than one name. Michael Panzer discussed the two sides of Dewey—the language-neutral side and language-dependent side—as an introduction to a research project under way with Deutsche Nationalbibliothek to explore the possibilities of an integrated display of Dewey in several different languages using MelvilClass. 

Diane Vizine-Goetz also demonstrated the latest version of Classify, a prototype classification support service.  Diane posed a series of questions for consideration by the group:

• Include other classification schemes?
• Display unclassed counts/percentages in summary and chart?
• Treat Fic, B, and E as DDC numbers?
• For latest edition, include full and abridged in summary?
• What should be included in details section?
• Include links to other services, e.g., ClassWeb?
• Add feature for class number suggestions?

Please try out Classify and feel free to comment here or directly on the Classify feedback form.

Model railroading

Recently I spent a few days with my younger brother, Joe, an avid model railroader. Our Saturday morning entertainment consisted of a twelve-hour period, compressed—thanks to the use of a 4:1 fast clock—into three hours, operating On3 scale model trains; the setting was a 18’ x 27’ room in Dave Adams’ home, with his 1930s-era D&RGW (Denver & Rio Grande Western Railway) Durlin Branch layout. (Less formal version: We ran model electric trains around a big room with a bunch of other model railroaders, who are all really nice guys.).  Since I can’t begin to describe how fun this was (and I was prepared to be bored), you should just see for yourself here (brother Joe is playing dispatcher in the next-to-last picture on the third row; nephew Joshua is servicing his engine at a water stop in the next-to-last picture of the first row,) and read for yourself here.

Comprehensive works on play with all types of model railroads and trains are classed in 790.133 Play with toys, where electric trains are mentioned specifically in an including note. However, the literature here is minimal—if you have to be told how to play with a model railroad, you might consider using your time some other way! Indeed, most uses of this number for railroads and trains are either for catalogs (e.g., Gilbert American Flyer Trains: Fun & thrills), multimedia (e.g., Trainz railroad simulator 2004), or the toys themselves (e.g., Stacking train; but note that these toy trains are not the electric variety!).

The “serious” literature on model railways and trains is classed in subdivisions of 625 Engineering of railroads. For example, The model locomotive from scratch is classed at 625.1961 Models of steam locomotives (built with 625.19 Model and miniature railroads and trains, plus 61 from 625.261 Steam locomotives, following instructions at 625.19); it should be noted that 625.19 is a displacement from 625[.100228].  Models and miniatures of a specific kind of special-purpose railroad are drawn off from 625.19 to 625.3-625.6; for example, Scale model electric tramways—and how to model them is classed in 625.60228 Models of surface rail and trolley systems (built with 625.6 Surface rail and trolley systems, plus T1—0228 Models and miniatures).