025.431: The Dewey blog

EPC 146 exhibits ready for review

The DDC Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) will next convene virtually for their annual Meeting 146, 22-23 July. All of the proposals they'll be reviewing our now available for review at our Google Drive page:

• EPC 146-S26.1 264.0191–264.0197 Orthodox Church Texts of liturgy, ritual, prayers
• EPC 146-S30.1 Intermarriage
• EPC 146-S36.1 New terms for mutiny and new numbers for piracy subjects
• EPC 146-S39.1 New Year and other variable holidays
• EPC 146-S39.2 Placement of initiation rites within topic of life cycle-based customs
• EPC 146-S62.1 Naval craft and drone ships
• EPC 146-S62.2 629.4 Astronautics
• EPC 146-S95.1 953.02-953.04 Arabian Peninsula and adjacent areas 622-1926
• EPC 146-T2.1 Counties of Albania
• EPC 146-T6.1 Names of Indigenous groups
• EPC 146-T6.2 Mi'kmaq language and people

Note that EPC 146-T6.1 lays out principles for respectful terminology for individual Indigenous groups, many of whom are currently labeled by names given by outsiders instead of the names they use for themselves. The exhibit proposes a framework for review of such names, but does not have a list of proposed changes, since a one-size-fits-all approach is not appropriate. EPC 146-T6.2 is the first such change proposal proper, proposing updating of "Micmac" to "Mi'kmaq".

At their meeting, EPC will discuss and vote on these proposals. If you have feedback, we welcome comments here, via email, or directly to EPC members. While we'll always do our best to accommodate later comments, it's best to make your voice heard before the first day of the meeting, 22 July.

If you'd like to propose a change for EPC's future consideration, just check the DDC contributors page at oc.lc/DeweyContributors to get started. I hope to hear from you!

Adding geographic notation

As you probably know, notation from Tables 2-6 can only be added where there are instructions to do so, unlike Table 1 Standard Subdivisions, which can generally be added anywhere unless instructions say otherwise (subject to a few restrictions—see the Introduction, 8(A)).

However, Table 2 notation can also be added to both numbers since there are standard subdivisions that build from it, namely T1—09 for areas in general and T1—093-099 for specific areas. This is also true of the ethnic and national groups of Table 5, via standard subdivision T1—089. Anecdotally, I think T1—09 is used more, though don’t forget that T1—08 is higher in the table of preference for Table 1 if you’re in doubt.

Thus, it’s easy to think of Table 2 as functionally more standard subdivisions. But they’re not! That means if you’re adding Table 2 directly, following instructions in the schedules, such as at 327.3-327.9 for international relations, you can still add a standard subdivision from Table 1 to the result, e.g., United States foreign relations 327.73, United States foreign relations in the 19^th century 327.73009034.

Otherwise, you can’t add one standard subdivision to another. That’s one of the restrictions laid out in the Introduction and at the beginning of Table 1. But there are some places where additional add table notation or other devices let you get around that, or to express multiple standard subdivision concepts while technically only using standard subdivisions once. Isn’t it fun how there are exceptions nested among exceptions?!

A great example of this is at T1—093-099.

The subdivisions with colons are add table notation. Some of them, such as the 03 and 05, are concepts also found in standard subdivisions. This lets you build a number like, say, a journal dedicated to nanotechnology in China, 620.5095105. The only standard subdivision there is the 09. You couldn’t add T1—05 after adding the notation for China, then, but you can still add T1—093-T1—099:05.

Just be careful when you use such devices. There is notably no 08 here, and the meaning of the notation besides 03 and 05 is narrowed compared to the full Table 1 standard subdivisions.

I want to close with something that’s been puzzling me, and I’m hoping someone can shed some light on the situation. Many, many WebDewey users use T1—093-T1—099:093-099 to express geographic notation instead of just standard subdivision T1—093-T1—099, and I don’t know why! You should only use this add table if you’ve already added T1—093-T1—099 first, not add it directly to base numbers.

I assume it’s harder to get to T1—093-T1—099:093-099 than T1—093-T1—099, and it would display later in search results. Are users bookmarking it? Is there a handy keyword search that favors it?

Now, in many cases, the actual number built still turns out correctly, but this does throw off things like the segmentation mark and synthesized number components. I have to manually fix those in contributed numbers before publishing them. But if you’ve been using T1—093-T1—099:093-099 this way, maybe try to break the habit. I still really want to know why the practice seems so common, though! Please share if you have any thoughts.

Free conversion tool for the 200s optional arrangement

I recently learned about a handy tool for libraries that want to implement the optional arrangement of religions in the 200s. It was created by Mark Swenson, IT Manager for the Winnetka-Northfield Public Library District in Illinois. It's available at https://content.wnpld.org/deweyconvert.php.

The tool uses the number-building formulae that support the optional arrangement, since notably, most specific numbers in the arrangement still need to be built with reference to the standard numbers. Mark was kind enough to share some comments about the converter:

I was inspired to do this project after attending a presentation at PLA 2024 by Alex along with Elizabeth McKinstry and Matthew Jaquith of Springfield City Library and Emily McDonald of Lawrence Public Library.  One of the resources which Emily provided was an Excel spreadsheet crosswalk for converting standard Dewey to the alternate arrangement and this is an implementation of that in code, first done in Perl for bulk conversion, and then in Dart/JavaScript for converting individual numbers.  It was useful to us in converting our collection and I hope for it to be a useful resource for other libraries with the hope that there can be greater adoption of the alternate classification arrangement.

Thank you, Mark, for making this available!

The Dewey Decimal Classification 2025 print-on-demand version is now available

By Charlotte Wells

Order Dewey print-on-demand

The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system is the world’s most widely used way to organize library collections and is regularly updated to reflect the modern world across any topic in multiple languages. The DDC is available in print and electronic (WebDewey) format.

 

Benefits of updating your current print version

Dewey print-on-demand is updated yearly to reflect changes to the DDC, and topics are covered comprehensively. Purchasing the new version helps your library remain a place of acceptance and enables your patrons to discover your materials efficiently.

 

What’s new for 2025?

• More detailed Manual guidance about the use of T1—0285 Computer applications; a few dedicated numbers for topics like online social networks, but mostly keeping topics with their digital equivalents, to reflect how daily activities like banking, communications, etc. happen today
• Improvements to numbers for topics in Islam, and more modern anglicized forms of terms (e.g., Qurʼan)
• New numbers for cryptocurrency and blockchains, plus ways to build numbers to show blockchains applied to specific topics
• A new, dedicated hierarchy for Ukrainian history, separate from the shared period table for other former Soviet states

This builds upon the updates featured in the 2024 version (e.g., more respectful terminology for autism, and modernized coverage of home care of people with illnesses and disabilities).

Order Dewey print-on-demand

Learn more about WebDewey. 

New WebDewey features: Built number management

Last month’s WebDewey install introduced a few new features that help you track built numbers. Whether you have multiple users at your institution or are a single-person operation, these features let you compare your local built numbers to globally established ones.

You’ll find the new Built Numbers page at the end of the top toolbar.

It defaults to a list of all built numbers. That’s roughly 21,000 numbers, though the exact count will depend on how many locally built numbers you have.

You can access six other groupings of built numbers, all subsets of the “All built numbers” search.

Some of these may be self-explanatory, but I’ll summarize each. It will help to think of built numbers as existing in three different levels: personal, institutional, and established.

Duplicate built numbers: Any DDC number that’s been built at more than one of the above levels (e.g., personal + established). This happens frequently when a contributed built number is accepted. We don’t overwrite your local version, which could have helpful search terms, but if the duplicates are unwanted, you can treat this search as a to-do list. If this search gives you no results, that’s not a bad thing!

Personal built numbers: All built numbers created by the current logged-in user. Hopefully they will look familiar, because they’re yours! They display with a single-person icon throughout WebDewey.

Institutional built numbers: All built numbers created by anyone at your institution, including you. They display with a two-person icon throughout WebDewey.

My institutional built numbers: All built numbers with institutional visibility created by you. This is a subset of the previous search. Unless you’ve created duplicates, this will not include the personal built numbers.

Manually built numbers: All personal or institutional built numbers that used a manual process, diverging from the number builder. They display with a question mark and single- or two-person icon, as appropriate, throughout WebDewey.

Established built numbers: All built numbers available to any WebDewey user, having been reviewed and published by DDC editors. They display with a puzzle-piece icon throughout WebDewey. They also have URIs in Dewey linked data.

New Spanish translation underway

OCLC is pleased to announce that it’s working with Referencistas, a Colombia-based library services company, to offer a Spanish translation of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system.

Like other current translations (French, German, Italian, Norwegian, and Swedish, with Arabic on the way), the Spanish DDC will be continually updated in line with changes made to the English version. After the conclusion of the initial translation, the Spanish DDC will also be added to Dewey linked data and a Spanish WebDewey subscription will be available. The previous Spanish translation was a print Edition 22, and this work marks the first in Edition 23.

We’re proud to add Spanish to the family of DDC translations, and we’re excited to welcome Referencistas and their team to this project. I look forward to sharing more information about the availability of the Spanish translation of the DDC in due course.

Addressing a few bugs

Some users have been experiencing issues with WebDewey preferences and layouts since the install earlier this week. We will shortly be deploying fixes for this, and there may be some minimal downtime.

WebDewey install March 4, 2025

A WebDewey install is scheduled for Tuesday, March 4, 2025. Please see the attached file for details.

Users may not experience any downtime, but one new feature will not be immediately available, as detailed on page 2 of the release notes. Look for one or more upcoming blog posts highlighting the new features in detail!

Download WebDewey March 4 Install Release Notes

Respectful comments on the Dewey blog

Comments on the Dewey blog are subject to the OCLC Code of Conduct and Terms of Use. Please take a moment to review those. You’ll likely find that you’re already comfortably abiding by them. Criticism of the DDC and editorial decisions, even strong criticism, is acceptable and even welcome, but personal attacks and derogatory comments about groups of people are not.

Comments that violate the Code of Conduct or Terms of Use will be removed without warning. OCLC may take action against repeat violations as appropriate.

Eastern European Classification webinar

Next week, the Catholic Library Association will host a webinar on Eastern European Classification. The event will be live 3:00-4:00 Eastern on Wednesday, January 15. I’ll be speaking on last year’s updates for Ukrainian history, their context in relation to neighboring countries, and possible avenues for future updates. You’ll also hear from Heidi Berthoud (Library of Congress), who will describe similar changes in Library of Congress Classification.

You don’t need to be a Catholic Library Association member to attend. Please see the event page for registration and full details. Hope to see you there!

EPC 145A exhibits ready for review

The DDC Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) will hold their next asynchronous meeting from January 6-31. At this meeting, Meeting 145A, they will consider a slate of exhibits with proposed changes to the classification. The following exhibits are available for review at our Google Drive page:

• EPC 145A-S8.1 830-890 Literatures of specific language families and classical literatures
• EPC 145A-S13.1 Natal astrology
• EPC 145A-S39.1 394 General customs
• EPC 145A-S51.1 Calculators
• EPC 145A-S93.1 Geographic treatment of archaeology
• EPC 145A-T1.1 T1--068 Management
• EPC 145A-T2.1 Provinces of Saudi Arabia

As always, I invite any interested users to review and comment on these proposals. You may do so here on the blog, via email, or at the DDC contributors forum at oc.lc/DeweyContributors. You can also share your comments directly with members of EPC.

Recent updates for political ideologies

In this post, I’d like to highlight a couple of exhibits approved at EPC Meeting 145 earlier this year: EPC 145-S32.1 Radicalism and EPC 145-S32.2 Christian nationalism. They were entwined enough that they might have been a single larger exhibit except for quirks of timing. The former was completed before work on the latter began.

EPC 145-S32.1 began in response to classifiers in Europe and the US asking for a clearer place to class works on far-right or radical right-wing ideologies. Political ideologies aren’t subdivided by left-right spectrum in DDC, partially due to how that spectrum differs, sometimes wildly, across countries. A natural place for ideologies labeled right wing is 320.52 Conservatism, but as some of these classifiers brought up, far right ideologies can diverge from conservatism, especially on the idea of “caution in effecting social change”, to quote our definition note.

Investigating this question, we noted that 320.53 was something of a catch-all for radical ideologies, though its former caption of “Collectivism and fascism” didn’t make that entirely clear. The exhibit brought radicalism from the class-here note to the caption, so now you’ll find 320.53 Radicalism, collectivism, fascism in WebDewey. We also authorized two new subdivisions, for left-wing and right-wing radicalism.

What makes a political ideology radical? The DDC does not seek to answer that, only to provide a place for works about ideologies considered radical. We also figured “radical” was rarely the most salient way to describe an ideology, and put in notes to suggest another number be used when applicable.

Meanwhile, EPC 145-S32.2 modestly expanded 320.55 Religiously oriented ideologies, which previously only had a single subdivision for Islamic ideologies. This exhibit began as an attempt to provide a place for Christian nationalism. We ended up drawing heavily from existing treatment of political Islam in doing so, identifying both social theological (261.7) and political ideology (the new 320.553) classes depending on disciplinary treatment.

We also decided to be a bit cautious, leaving Christian nationalism in an including note at both numbers, as it’s just one political ideology drawing from Christianity. There was enough literature to justify some development here, but not so much that we can’t afford to wait a bit. Better to have the topic in standing room now and later move it to a new number than putting it in a class-here note now and later deciding it’s getting conflated with other ideas.

Take a look at these changes in WebDewey, or in print-on-demand beginning in 2025, and let us know what you think. And for those of you about to celebrate US Thanksgiving—may politics come up at the dinner table no more than you want, even (especially?) if that’s none at all.

Want to join FPOC? Act FAST!

Do you use FAST? Would you like to help drive the future of it? If so, see the below announcement from my colleague Cynthia Whitacre, but note the deadline! And stay tuned here for more on DDC/FAST collaboration.

FAST Policy and Outreach Committee

The FAST Policy and Outreach Committee (FPOC) is seeking one new member for a position that will become available in January 2025.

Established in September 2018, the joint committee of OCLC and FAST implementers acts as an advisory and outreach body. Their priority is to ensure FAST will be a fully supported, widely adopted and community developed general subject vocabulary derived from LCSH with tools and services that serve the needs of diverse communities and contexts.

Members serve for a maximum of two terms, each of two years, and are eligible to serve as co-chair.  The committee meets online bi-monthly, with meetings usually lasting one hour. Members are also expected to contribute to the advisory work of the committee and the promotion of FAST.

Membership guidelines can be found here [PDF]. Interested candidates can self-nominate using this form and return it no later than October 31, 2024.

FPOC is focused on promoting the use and implementation of OCLC’s faceted vocabulary and encourages candidates working in diverse subject areas to apply. 

WebDewey install scheduled for October 23, 2024

A WebDewey install is scheduled for Wednesday, October 23, 2024 at 6:00am ET. You may experience up to 15 minutes of downtime during this install.

A WebDewey install is scheduled for Wednesday, October 23, 2024 at 6:00am ET. You may experience up to 15 minutes of downtime during this install.

A WebDewey install is scheduled for Wednesday, October 23, 2024 at 6:00am ET. You may experience up to 15 minutes of downtime during this install.

WebDewey install scheduled for October 17, 2024

A WebDewey install is scheduled for Thursday, October 17, 2024 at 6:00am ET. You may experience up to 15 minutes of downtime during this install.

A WebDewey install is scheduled for Thursday, October 17, 2024 at 6:00am ET. You may experience up to 15 minutes of downtime during this install.

New historical periods for Ukraine

One of the recent changes from EPC Meeting 145 is an entirely new development for the historical periods of Ukraine. Previously, Ukraine’s historical periods were primarily built using the table at 947.5-947.9 European countries of former Soviet Union other than Russia; Caucasus area of Russia. That’s a long caption, but it accurately conveys what’s within, namely, that European countries (besides Russia) formerly part of the Soviet Union shared historical periods, which closely followed those of Russia itself.

The exception? Ancient history, where Ukraine to the year 640 classed at 939.52 Sarmatia. This left no way to represent Ukrainian history from 640 to 1796, although some classifiers did so by adding the respective period notation from Russia, following the spirit, if not the letter, of the 947.5-947.9 table.

In the aftermath of the Soviet Union’s dissolution, shared historical periods for these countries made more sense, as each faced common issues with reestablishing independence. But 30 years later, some differentiation was called for, especially in the case of Ukraine with Russia’s invasion of the country. Our colleagues at the Library of Congress came to a similar conclusion, recently redoing the history of Ukraine in Library of Congress Classification (LCC).

The change in the DDC was driven in large part by former Editor in Residence Kathryn Becker. Together, she and I investigated the LCC changes. We’re also indebted to Dr. Slava Zavalin, assistant professor of library and information science at Texas Woman’s University and a former teacher of Kathryn’s, for his input.

Trying to fit new historical periods into the existing framework of 947.707-947.947.708 would have been difficult. We proposed a complete revision, like LCC had done, which EPC ultimately agreed to. The new development can be found at 947.701-947.706 Historical periods of Ukraine. This also means you should be able to tell at a glance when a work on Ukrainian history was classed, as 947.707-947.708 are no longer valid.

One special number I’ll highlight is 947.7062 2014-, which covers the larger Russo-Ukrainian war that started in that year as well as the 2022 invasion and ongoing conflict. An instruction there authorizes addition from the “war table” at 940-990, allowing classifiers to build numbers such as 947.70622 for diplomatic history of the war, 947.70627 prisoners of war, etc.

When classifying works on the Russo-Ukrainian war, don’t forget to refer to the guidance at the 930-990 Manual note. Most works on the war will class at 947.7062 unless they fit one of the exceptions noted there, e.g., everyday life in Kyiv province during the period 947.77062, effect of the war on life in Russia 947.0864.

How about the other countries that add from 947.5-947.9? We decided to take things one step at a time, and will be happy to work with anyone who’s interested in creating developments for those countries’ historical periods. I think Ukraine will be a good precedent for totally redoing those countries’ periods, but if we can maintain backward compatibility with the numbers built from 947.5-947.9, that’s good too. Stay tuned!

You can explore these changes in WebDewey, and they’ll appear in print-on-demand versions from 2025 onward.

OCLC releases Dewey linked data

OCLC is committed to its linked data strategy, and we continue to publish existing library information as linked data in ways that support better description and discovery of library resources across the web. We’ve already made fundamental steps forward in building a linked data ecosystem with the release of OCLC Meridian and WorldCat Entities. And now, we’re pleased to announce the transformation of another dataset: the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system.   

Unlocking the power of Dewey 

We’re unlocking the power of the DDC to build an increasingly robust linked data infrastructure by creating uniform resource identifiers (URIs) for Dewey numbers. As the foundation for our “concept” entities, this Dewey linked data provides subject classifications to Works entities in WorldCat Entities, creating a layer of new relationships for knowledge graphs that power discovery.  

These identifiers make the Dewey classification numbers more meaningful, create connections between broad classification numbers and specific subject topics, and provide multi-language labels for otherwise opaque numbers. Using machine-actionable and web-friendly URIs, Dewey linked data connects across established classifications and subject headings data. For example, the OCLC Research team mapped Dewey classifications to FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) topical headings, enabling relationships to the Dewey linked data. 

Who can access Dewey linked data? 

Anyone is free to view and access a base set of Dewey linked data and can begin integrating Dewey URIs into their local data management and discovery systems today.

Libraries that subscribe to WebDewey have access to the full range of Dewey linked data URIs and associated metadata. In addition, two new APIs are available that enable users to easily integrate Dewey linked data into other systems and services. WebDewey users can access these APIs as part of their subscription.

Access Dewey linked data

Find more detail about our linked data strategy at oc.lc/linkeddata.

Learn more about our WebDewey service at oc.lc/webdewey.

Please excuse duplication of this message.

Vaping: A roundabout journey

No, this isn’t about a modern reimagining of The Hobbit—it’s the story of how we eventually found a place for vaping in the DDC. For a single topic, it took us a while.

We all know the DDC is discipline based, right? So what discipline does vaping belong to? Several of them. When introducing a topic into the classification, it’s always a good idea to consider whether there are similar topics that could either form models for a new development, or even whether the new topic can go in an existing number.

Vaping first came to our attention in the “before times”, identified as a priority by respondents in a 2019 user survey. Emily Zinger, our intern that year, assisted then-editor Violet Fox in researching the topic, as did volunteer contributor Josh Hall. Their efforts culminated in exhibit EPC 142C-S36.1 Vaping and vaping devices.

You’re welcome to read the whole exhibit, but to summarize, they looked at how tobacco products, smoking, and cigarettes were treated in the DDC. They identified an important split between vaping as an activity versus vape devices (also known as e-cigarettes, e-cigs, vape pens, vapes, and many other terms) and their liquid, which can be covered in disciplines such as manufacturing. It was a great start, but ultimately, EPC sent it back for further work. It took us a while to prepare a revamped exhibit, but in our defense, it was 2020.

I led the efforts on this year’s version, EPC 145-S36.2. I kept “Vaping and vaping devices” as the title, which I believe I suggested before. (Was I inspired by a certain King of the Hill catchphrase? I’ll never tell!) As I noted in the exhibit, last year’s Editor in Residence, Kathryn Becker, helped a lot to get us back on track with the topic. It really does take a village.

My general approach was to start with the previous exhibit, which had solved a lot of the fundamentals, but to scale back a bit, saving some similar topics, such as indoor smoking bans and other law aspects, for another day.

You can see all of the approved changes live in WebDewey, which differ in some respects from what I proposed. An important one, inspired by feedback from colleagues in the UK, was to put vaping in including notes, limiting it to standing room.

Why? For all the interest in the topic, we just haven’t seen that much literature on it. I still expect it to grow, but it didn’t grow as much as I expected since 2020, for example. Using including notes here is more “future-proof”, in that if we later decide to give smoking and vaping different numbers, we can do so. Conversely, if we decide class-here notes are more appropriate, that the topics should be treated the same, it’s easier for us to shift that way, and allow number building, than vice versa, which would entail invalidating numbers users could otherwise have built in the meantime.

I’m glad to say that once we really get to work on an exhibit, the timeline is shorter than it was here. But the journey of vaping is also a good example of how the extra time to get it right can really pay off.

EPC 145 changes live in WebDewey

EPC Meeting 145 concluded with all exhibits ultimately approved. Some were subject to amendment, so as usual, what you see in the Google Drive is what was proposed, not necessarily the final version that was approved. Always consult WebDewey for the most authoritative information.* Fortunately, all of the changes from EPC 145 are already live there! Keep an eye on the Dewey blog in September for posts highlighting some of those changes.

Regular readers may know what I'm going to say now: you, too, can be a part of the editorial process! We're always accepting suggestions for changes big and small. You can use the "Help Revise the DDC" form in the WebDewey footer, email us, comment here... as long as your message gets to us, there's no wrong way to do it. You could see your work in the DDC in the next round of revisions--or even earlier.

*Oh yeah, and speaking of things that are live, there's a little thing called Dewey linked data you can browse now! Explore the summaries freely, or log on with your existing English WebDewey account to see the whole thing in all six languages. Stay tuned for more information.

Recording available for the OCLC cataloging community virtual meeting

If you weren't able to attend the OCLC cataloging community virtual meeting--or if you did, and want to listen again--a recording and slides are now available on the OCLC website: https://www.oclc.org/go/en/events/cataloging-community-meeting/june-2024.html.

Please note this mostly just covers the presentation portion of the meeting, in which I and three colleagues from public libraries discussed the optional arrangement for religion in the 200s. It does include the Q&A portion of the presentation, but not the general cataloging Q&A that followed.