025.431: The Dewey blog

Changing climates

My DDC career started in 2011, when I was the first ever DDC intern. Fresh out of the University of North Carolina’s School of Information and Library Science, I had assigned DDC numbers to around a thousand works in a side job for an environmental nonprofit in the area. I had seen firsthand how those works were going all sorts of places in the schedules, and during my internship, I thought I might put together a proposal to bring them together.

That never happened, because I realized that environmental studies is interdisciplinary by nature. That’s not to say one couldn’t bring them all together—the Chinese Library Classification largely does, in its X section—but doing so would have caused significant disruption elsewhere in the schedules.

I picked up the cause again a few years ago, both out of personal interest and requests from users and colleagues, such as those at the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. Probably the biggest issue I found was a lack of the phrase “climate change” in the DDC at all. The closest thing we had was “global warming”. As much as there is warming around the globe, you probably hear “climate change” more often now, as we’ve come to understand there’s more to it than just warming, such as extreme weather events or even significant cold.

In EPC Meeting 144, we took a big step forward on the topic of climate change in the DDC. You can review the full exhibit for more of what went into this, or see the changes now live in WebDewey. Today, I just wanted to highlight some of the more significant aspects of it:

• Climate change and global warming are now in the class-here note at 363.7 Environmental problems. This recognizes climate change as the central environmental problem, allowing for number building throughout this hierarchy. Previously, global warming was in a class-here note at 363.73874 Greenhouse gases, a more technical number under pollution. Users often prefer shorter numbers, and this means climate change is at a number valid for abridged classification.
• We have designated 551.6 Climatology and weather as the comprehensive number for scientific works on climate change. Previously, the Manual note 551.5 vs. 551.6 seemed to push you more towards 551.5 Meteorology. That may still be appropriate for some works, but trying to separate climatology from climate change science would just be too confusing.
• New topics such as climate justice and social consequences of climate change have been added.

I say this is a step forward both because it’s a very active area in science and because, like many editorial efforts, it’s brought our attention to other areas. So what’s next? Economic aspects. Expect to see work on topics such as carbon trading, environmental credits, and sustainable investing.

And as always, I hope you’ll be a part of those next steps. What are some topics that you’re having trouble classifying? What does and doesn’t work about the schedules for you? Like addressing climate change, maintaining the DDC is a group effort too.

EPC 144 exhibits ready for review

The DDC Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) will hold their annual meeting from 12-14 July. At this meeting, Meeting 144, 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 144-S27.1 272.1-.9 Persecutions in general church history--historical periods
• EPC 144-S30.1 Transvestism and cross dressing
• EPC 144-S30.2 304.8 Movement of people and 325 International migration and colonization
• EPC 144-S36.1 365.47 Institutions for immigrants and refugees
• EPC 144-S36.2 Climate change
• EPC 144-S61.1 Gender dysphoria
• EPC 144-S61.2 Autism spectrum disorder; Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
• EPC 144-S64.1 649.8 Home care of people with illnesses and disabilities by family and friends
• EPC 144-S74.1 Design in 745-749 (discussion paper)
• EPC 144-S79.1 Drag
• EPC 144-S89.1 Period table for Cornish literature at 891.67
• EPC 144-T2.1 Subdivisions of Pakistan
• EPC 144-T2.2 Subdivisions of Central Asian countries
• EPC 144-T5.1 Black people and White people
• EPC 144-T5.2 Irish Travellers (Mincéirs)

Some of these proposals come straight from DDC users, and many others were prompted by questions or suggestions. I've already had a proposal sent to me for the next meeting! If you'd like to be a part of that, I encourage you to get in touch. And for EPC 144, I encourage 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.

“How can people change their minds about us if they don’t know who we are?” – Harvey Milk

Between my internship time constraints (I’m 2/3 of the way through), preparing presentations for our OCLC team, and the researching, writing, revising exhibits for our EPC meeting in July, we’ve been busy here these past few months in the DDC office.  Let me tell you a bit about the projects I’ve been working on.

My focus has been on topics that primarily affect the LGBTQIA+ community.  Currently, I have three projects that will be presented to the EPC board for approval; I’m hoping to have at least one more, and if I can manage it, two more projects by then.  Curious?  I’m excited to tell you about them, so read on!

My first topic was suggested by a librarian (remember, you can email us at [email protected] with ideas and suggestions) for the best place to classify books on drag  Once I researched the history behind drag, what drag is and isn’t, and the talented people that perform drag, we will be proposing a number of 792.72 Drag, which falls under the 792 Stage presentations.  In other words, drag will have its space so that readers can find information and understanding. 

While researching drag, it became quickly apparent that the topic of transvestism (306.778) needed to be addressed as well.  First, the term is outdated with cross dressing being the preferred term.  Secondly, referring to scholarly works and articles, it quickly became clear that the intention of cross dressing determines how the topic should be classified.  This led to many discussions with agreement to not only change “transvestism” to “cross dressing”, but to deprecate 306.778, and also create 391.68 Cross dressing, under the 391.6 Personal appearance classification. 

Of course, cross dressing is also related to gender identity.  Historically, Dewey follows current knowledge and accepted practices.  At one point, the topic of “gender identity disorder” was classified as a sexual disorder at 616.8583 under the broader mental disorders and next to sex addiction and sexual abuse.  Not only is this outdated, but it reduces individuals into medical specimens.  Once again referring to DSM–5, ICD–11, and various scholarly medical articles, I found that science is gaining a better understanding of the biological influences on gender identity, and the adoption of the term “gender dysphoria” is much more accurate and meaningful.  Gender dysphoria is more of an emotion based condition than an ailment, and acceptance and affirmation is the largest part of moving forward.  The DDC is crowded and finding just the right place was difficult.  With some input from gender nonconforming librarians, the proposal of expanding 616.8527 Depressive disorders (which already includes other emotional disorders) to become “Depressive disorders and dysphoria” (as there are 4 main types of known dysphoria) is supported and brings the topic more inline with today’s knowledge.

Knowledge is a powerful thing.  Expanding that knowledge is what libraries are about.  Maybe the knowledge in these topics will help someone understand their daughter or son, brother or sister, parents, friends, neighbors, or even themselves.  That’s what the DDC editors are here for—helping libraries help their users expand their knowledge.

On the other hand...

Consistency, standards, and respectful language are all goals of the DDC editorial team.  How do you achieve that when the subject at hand has different opinions with valid arguments?  You have the discussions, you do the research, discuss again, and ask for others’ thoughts on the matter.

The discussion topic we are currently having is the capitalization of the words “Black” and “White” when referring to racial groups.  We agree that “Black” should be capitalized.  There was no debate on that aspect among the editorial team.  However, the “w” in “white” remains debatable.  Reading many opinion pieces and articles by predominantly Black voices, there are a few questions we must answer to decide.  Some feel that a capital “W” forces the thinking of racial constructs, while others feel the capital “W” gives validity to white supremacy groups that also use the capital letter. 

Many publications and writing style guides are in disagreement as well.  The Chicago Style Manual (2020), 7th Edition of the American Psychological Association’s Publication Manual (2020), The Washington Post, the Chicago Tribune and the Center for the Study of Social Policy advocacy group all capitalize the “W”, while the Associated Press, The New York Times, and the Columbia Journalism Review do not, preferring the lower case “w”.  The MLA 9^th edition (2021) guides users to lowercase both terms.  Canada’s The Globe and Mail is using “Black” and “white” in its publications, while the United Kingdom’s The Guardian Style Guide uses “black”, but also recognizes authors may prefer “Black”.  Again, there is no consensus. 

From a library standpoint, the Library of Congress Subject Headings capitalizes “Black” but not “white”, and while Dewey is not a part of the Library of Congress, we do work closely with their classifiers.  If the DDC was to follow LCSH’s entries, it could make things easier in the future for any bulk changing within a library system. 

What are your thoughts?  What option would work best for your users?  We would love to hear your opinion on the subject.

EPC 143A exhibits available for review

In January, we'll have Electronic Meeting 143A of the Editorial Policy Committee (EPC). You can view the following revision proposals at oc.lc/deweyexhibits: 

• EPC 143A-S29.1 - 297.48 Sufi orders
• EPC 143A-S30.1 - Movement of people and 325 International migration and colonization
• EPC 143A-S73.1 - 730 Sculpture and related arts
• EPC 143A-S94.1 - Ionian Islands
• EPC 143A-T1.1 - Further updates to terminology for groups of people

EPC will be voting on these the week of January 30-February 3. Please share any feedback, positive or negative! You can do so by commenting on this post, posting to the the Dewey Contributors Google Group, or by email to [email protected] or an EPC member.

Autism in the DDC

I don’t quite remember what recently brought “An Autistic Take on DDC”, a blog post on the ALSC Blog, back to my screen. It was written in 2018. It’s still a very thoughtful take on the subject, and the author knows how to flatter (“The Dewey gods”!).

The post’s main criticism of the DDC’s treatment of autism, as I understand it, is the medicalized perspective the DDC takes. Numbers about autism and autistic people are almost exclusively found in the medicine schedules, or disability elsewhere. This is also reflected in built numbers, such as 362.19685882 (valid, but not currently in WebDewey) for social services to autistic people, built with 616.85882 Autism.

This is as good a time as any to remember that any given topic might fit in plenty of places in the DDC beyond where they’re explicitly mentioned. The author of “An Autistic Take” pines for books about autistics in 323 Civil and political rights, but he need not wait: 323.374 is a suitable place already for civil and political rights of autistic people.

Now, the caveats: when classifiers overlook valid numbers, that may be a sign that we could improve some things from the editorial side. And it certainly doesn’t mean there’s no room for improvement. With autism not mentioned anywhere in T1—08 Groups of people, it may not be apparent that autistic people can be expressed via T1—0874 People with mental illness and disabilities. Even if it is apparent, I wouldn’t blame someone for being dissatisfied with that notation.

What’s the best solution here? That’s what I’d like to ask you. What sort of works does your institution have on autism and autistic people? Does current coverage of the topic in the DDC meet your needs? If not, I welcome your feedback, or would be happy to work on a proposal with you.

Outdated terms in the DDC: Aliens

Now that EPC 143 has concluded, you should already be seeing changes published to WebDewey. Last week, we rolled out the first batch of changes analyzed by our editor-in-residence, Kelly West. There’s more to come, but this batch specifically focused on the use of “aliens” for people resident in a country in which they aren’t citizens. (Not extraterrestrials, but the confusion there is one reason “alien” is becoming deprecated in the field more broadly.)

The saga of the LCSH “Illegal aliens” has been told frequently, to the point where it is presumably the only LCSH with its own Wikipedia article. The short version: it was most notably critiqued by a group of student activists at Dartmouth College in 2014, and over 7+ years, it was eventually replaced. The LCSH had been mapped in WebDewey, and was replaced there after the Library of Congress made the change.

While the DDC never used the exact phrase “illegal aliens”, we still had several places where we used “aliens”. The case against “illegal aliens” was more than that exact phrase. Alone, “aliens” tends to conjure up images of extraterrestrials – notably, non-human beings – and in general, it’s never good if you’re alienated, or experiencing alienation. Kelly’s EPC exhibit included further research on this, along with other potentially problematic terms.

We have now greatly reduced the use of “aliens” in the DDC. In most cases, it was replaced with “Noncitizens”, similar to what the Library of Congress did. We attempted to avoid unique coinages though, so we preferred existing terms such as “Foreign labor” to the novel “Noncitizen labor”.

The only place you’ll still see “aliens” (in this sense) is in the Relative Index. The see-also reference there to Noncitizens tells you that this is a nonpreferred term. There is a strong argument for completely removing potentially offensive terms like these in user-facing systems; the term’s use in the Relative Index doesn’t change that. But it’s still a term classifiers are likely to run into, whether in older works or in legal contexts where the exact word is used.

The index entry continues to provide access for classifiers, while pointing to the correct, current term. We also reduced the appearance of “aliens” in the index to just the interdisciplinary number (305.90691) and the standard subdivision (T1—08691), so we replaced terms with subheadings like “Aliens—literature” with “Noncitizens—literature”, etc.

Expect to see similar changes in the future, both in the shorter term from Kelly’s work and in the longer term as we continue to ensure the DDC’s terms for people are accurate, current, and respectful.

Results of EPC 143

The Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) met virtually in June to consider the slate of exhibits finalized back in May. Most were approved, and you’ll be seeing them rolling out into WebDewey in the coming weeks. (One is already there! More on that soon.)

Two exhibits were sent back for further work:

• EPC 143-S29.1c - 297.48 Sufi orders
• EPC 143-S30.1 - 304.8 Movement of people

For EPC 143-S29.1c, there was consensus among the committee that more specific Sufi orders should be provided for, beyond those proposed in the exhibit. We welcome feedback from users around the world, or anyone with interest or expertise in the topic, even if they aren’t users, to help represent Sufi orders that are frequently the subject of published literature.

On EPC 143-S30.1, the topic is just complicated! Where do you class a work on immigration to a specific country, emigration from a country, or works that cover both? When does a work on immigration belong with community sociology or political science instead of the interdisciplinary number? We’ll revisit the issue at the next electronic EPC meeting, towards the end of this year.

Keep checking the blog for posts highlighting specific changes from EPC 143 as they’re added to WebDewey, but keep your eye on the WebDewey updates feed too, as not every exhibit will necessarily lead to a blog post.

Last but certainly not least, there are a few new (and returning!) faces joining EPC, and that will lead to a blog post!

EPC 143 exhibits ready for review

The Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) will meet virtually in early June for their Meeting 143. Dates and times will vary based on members' availability. You can view the following revision proposals at oc.lc/deweyexhibits:

• EPC 143-S29.1a - Introduction, Islam and secular disciplines
• EPC 143-S29.1b - 297.38 Rites, ceremonies, prayer, meditation
• EPC 143-S29.1c - 297.48 Sufi orders
• EPC 143-S29.1d - 297.54 Zakat
• EPC 143-S29.1e - 297.576 Individual observances
• EPC 143-S30.1 - 304.8 Movement of people
• EPC 143-S30.2 - Disasters as causes of social change
• EPC 143-S74.1 - Graphic design and communication design
• EPC 143-T1.2 - Terminology in T1--08 Groups of people
• EPC 143-T2.1 - Kosovo
• EPC 143-T2.2 - T2--599 Philippines
• EPC 143-T6.1 - T6--9549 Eastern Himalayan languages; T5--9549 Eastern Himalayan peoples

(To paraphrase guidance we give on the Summaries, Consult exhibits for complete and exact titles.)

Please share any feedback, positive or negative! You can do so by commenting on this post, posting to the the Dewey Contributors Google Group, or by email to [email protected] or an EPC member.

EPC 142D exhibits available for review

This week marks the start of Electronic Meeting 142D of the Editorial Policy Committee (EPC). You can view the following revision proposals at oc.lc/deweyexhibits: 

• EPC 142D-S39.1 - Wedding planning and other events associated with customs
  • EPC 142D-S39.1a - Wedding planning
  • EPC 142D-S39.1b - Customs and associated events
• EPC 142D-S54.1 - Geographic treatment of minerals and mineralogy
• EPC 142D-S61.1 - 615.53 General therapeutic systems
• EPC 142D-S79.1 - Geocaching
• EPC 142D-S98.1 - Presidents of Colombia
• EPC 142D-T2.1 - Provinces of Bulgaria

EPC will be voting on these the last week in April. Please share any feedback, positive or negative! You can do so by commenting on this post, posting to the the Dewey Contributors Google Group, or by email to [email protected] or an EPC member.