025.431: The Dewey blog

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 Schedules, 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 dewey@oclc.org or an EPC member.

Sign languages

Guest post by Julianne Beall

Here is the report on EPC 142C-S41.1 Sign languages promised in the blog post Results of electronic meeting EPC 142C.

First, some context. Most sign languages are used primarily for communication among deaf people or between hearing and deaf people. Typically, deaf community sign languages are developed and used primarily by deaf people, and learned by hearing people in order to communicate with deaf people. Some sign languages are used by everyone in a small community with a high incidence of deafness. Comprehensive works on all these sign languages are classed in 419 Sign languages. Specific instances of these sign languages (and geographic groupings of such languages) are classed in 419.4-419.9 Sign languages used primarily for communication among deaf people or between hearing and deaf people.

In EPC 142C-S41.1, we made miscellaneous changes for clarity, but focused especially on the small minority of sign languages that are used primarily for communication among hearing people. We changed the caption at 419.1 to Sign languages used primarily for communication among hearing people. We deleted the including note "Including monastic sign languages, sign languages used as lingua francas among hearing persons" and instead provided built numbers illustrating that notation T1—08 Groups of people can be used to indicate which groups of people are the primary users of the sign language, regardless of the purpose for which the sign language is used. For example, works about the sign languages historically used as trade languages and lingua francas among many different groups of North American native peoples are classed in 419.108997 North American native peoples—sign languages—for hearing people (built with 419.1 plus T1—089 Ethnic and national groups plus T5—97 North American native peoples).

Works on baby sign language (also called baby signing) can be classed in 419.10832 Infants—sign languages—for hearing people (built with 419.1 plus T1—0832 Infants). The Wikipedia entry for baby sign language begins: "Baby sign language is the use of manual signing allowing infants and toddlers to communicate emotions, desires, and objects prior to spoken language development." Works on baby sign language are typically aimed at hearing parents with hearing children. The signs are taught to infants and toddlers in conjunction with speech, and when the child learns to speak, baby signing is typically discontinued. Signs from deaf community sign languages may be adapted for baby signing, but they do not function in this context like the full language from which they have been borrowed. An example of a work that can be classed in 419.10832 is Teach your baby to sign: An illustrated guide to simple sign language for babies and toddlers by Monica Beyer.

Should some works about baby signing be classed with a deaf community sign language in 419.4-419.9 Sign languages used primarily for communication among deaf people or between hearing and deaf people?  Only works aimed at teaching a specific sign language to a baby with a long-term need to use that language correctly for communication with deaf people should be classed there, e.g., 419.700832 Infants—American Sign Language (built with 419 Sign languages plus T2—7 North America plus T1—0832 Infants).

Results of electronic meeting EPC 142C

During the month of October, the Dewey Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) reviewed seven exhibits. Six were approved, with one sent back for further work. This post will summarize changes from these exhibits; consult WebDewey, where all changes are live, for full details.

EPC 142C-S02.1 Library programs has introduced a new class, 025.57 Library programs on specific subjects. You can add up to three digits to this base number from 001-999 for specific subjects, such as 025.578 for creative writing programs, or 025.57929 for genealogy programs. Just keep in mind the class-elsewhere note at 025.5. Works on programs on specific subjects for specific groups will go with the group (e.g., 027.625 for children).

EPC 142C-S20.1 Religious conversion authorizes 204.24 Conversion in comparative religion, which was formerly in an including note at 204.2. For a while now, the DDC has had numbers for conversion in specific religions (e.g., 248.24 for Christianity), but not for the idea of religious conversion more broadly.

Look for a full blog post about EPC 142C-S41.1 Sign languages soon!

EPC 142C-S62.1 Arms and armor resolves some issues with 623.441 Small arms of pre-firearm origin ("Weaponry of prefirearm origin" before the changes). This expansion authorizes six new subclasses for specific types of weapons, e.g., 623.4416 Bows and arrows, and also develops for new numbers under 623.42 Specific pieces of artillery. Armor is still stuck in this "weapons" hierarchy, now at 623.4418 Armor, but hopefully the situation is more clear than before!

EPC 142C-T2.1 Counties of Kenya and EPC 142-T2.2 Regions of Denmark give more specific Table 2 notation for those two countries.

This leaves EPC 142C-S36.1 Vaping and vaping devices. This is an area that Dewey users have rated as a high priority for future development, but EPC had questions about this proposal, and we want to make sure we get it right. Expect to hear more about this in the future.

Special thanks go out to our community volunteers who worked on these proposals: Julianne Beall, Michael Cantlon, Bradley Carrington, Josh Hall, and Winton Matthews.

Draft proposals for DDC revisions now available

I'm pleased to announce that the editorial team will now be requesting feedback on potential changes from a larger audience—that is, you!

As I mentioned in my blog post FAQs of a New Dewey Editor, the primary job of the editors is to research publishing trends and make suggestions about potential changes to the Dewey schedules and tables. Once we've completed our research, we publish those suggestions in an exhibit, which is simply a document that summarizes our research and makes an argument for revising the DDC. A few times a year, we bring these exhibits to the Editorial Policy Committee (EPC), a group of ten people representing libraries from around the world. The EPC gives feedback and votes on whether to implement the changes that the editors propose.

We'll now be sharing those exhibits with a wider audience: everyone who has Internet access, in fact! You can now find the most recent exhibits we've shared with EPC at oc.lc/DeweyExhibits. To be clear, these are proposals and may not be implemented as written. EPC often requests changes (large and small), or asks editors to revise entirely, before exhibits are approved.

We’ll be pleased to hear your feedback on this initial group of exhibits, which covers topics such as space flight and travel, birds, Montenegrin language, asexuality, Two-Spirit people, and a notation for optional arrangement of the 200s. Voting by the EPC members on this group of proposals begins on Monday February 25, so if you have comments, please send those to us at dewey@oclc.org before that date.

Endangered languages

Recently we have added notes to clarify how to classify works on endangered languages and responses to language endangerment (approved at EPC meeting 141 in October).

The key notes are found at the interdisciplinary number, 306.44 Language:

Class here anthropological linguistics, ethnolinguistics, sociolinguistics; endangered languages; responses to endangerment of languages, e.g., language documentation, language revitalization

Class effects of language endangerment on specific linguistic elements with the linguistic element, e.g., effects of language endangerment on morphology 415.9

Class documentation of a specific language or language family with the language or language family, e.g., a grammar of Koroshi (a dialect of Baluchi) 491.598

As Rebecca Green, former Dewey Editorial Program Manager, wrote to EPC:

Causes of language endangerment include natural catastrophes, famine, disease; war and genocide; overt repression; and cultural/political/economic dominance (Austin and Sallabank, p. 5). Of these, the latter category is the most common.

Responses to the shrinking diversity of human language have included language documentation, that is, an attempt to record the basic vocabulary and syntax of a language before it dies, and language revitalization, an attempt to reverse the decline of native speakers of the language.

We see endangered languages as a sociolinguistic phenomenon, with 306.44 Language (with anthropological linguistics, ethnolinguistics, and sociolinguistics named in its class-here note) as the best number for interdisciplinary works. Sociocultural factors are typically prominent in both the decay and the attempted revival of an endangered language, further supporting the choice of an interdisciplinary number under 306.44 over a number in the 4xx hierarchy.

Austin, Peter K., and Julia Sallabank. 2015. The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Because endangered languages and responses to endangered languages are in a class-here note at 306.44, standard subdivisions can be added, and subdivisions of 306.44 are available, for example:

306.442 Anthropological linguistics, ethnolinguistics, sociolinguistics of a specific language

306.449 Language planning and policy

 At 410 Linguistics are these notes:

Class here . . . . interdisciplinary works on language documentation

For sociolinguistics, language documentation as a response to endangerment of languages, see 306.44

At 417.7 Historical linguistics (Diachronic linguistics) is this note:

Class endangered languages in 306.44

Here are examples of works classed in 306.44 Language:

Endangered languages: An introduction (306.44)

Language death: Factual and theoretical explorations with special reference to East Africa (306.4409676—built with 306.44 plus T1—09 plus T2—Uganda and Kenya, which has note “Class here East Africa”)

Reversing language shift in the Far North: Linguistic revitalization in Northern Scandinavia and Finland (306.44948—built with 306.449 Language planning and policy plus T2—48 Scandinavia and Finland)

Note: The Cambridge handbook of endangered languages should also be classed in 306.44.

Here are examples of works classed in 400s:

A grammar of Tundra Nenets (494.4—built with 494 Altaic, Uralic, Hyperborean, Dravidian languages, miscellaneous languages of south Asia plus numbers following T6—94 in T6—944 Samoyedic languages)

 A grammar of Chiapas Zoque (497.43—built with 497.4 Penutian, Mayan, Mixe-Zoque, Uto-Aztecan, Kiowa-Tanoan languages plus numbers following T6—974 in T6—9743 Mixe-Zoque languages)

 

EPC Meeting 141

On October 15–16, Meeting 141 of the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) Editorial Policy Committee (EPC) was held at OCLC headquarters in Dublin, Ohio. Often held in June, this year’s meeting was pushed back to October; with Rebecca Green’s retirement and Violet Fox joining the team, we wanted the extra time to be able to present a full agenda to the committee. As it turns out, Rebecca was able to join us for this meeting, allowing her to present the exhibits she had worked on and to say goodbye to EPC members.

This year’s meeting was the first face-to-face meeting for new member Elise Conradi from the National Library of Norway. Readers may recall that at last year’s meeting, the committee updated its bylaws, including provision for a member representing the European Dewey Users Group (EDUG), and EDUG elected Elise as its representative shortly thereafter. Member Gert de Jager, finalizing his dissertation on Dewey, was unable to attend. Also in attendance were Jody DeRidder, Marti Heyman, and Sandi Jones from OCLC. The meeting included presentations from OCLC Research Scientist Diane Vizine-Goetz, and from Stephen Schindehette, Technical Product Manager for Data Services and WorldCat Quality Management.

The committee approved two changes to the editorial rules, which govern how the editorial team works. The first establishes procedures for dealing with Relative Index terms that could be considered offensive to groups of people. This arose when the editorial team was contacted by a Dewey user from Ethiopia who identified a dated, offensive term for an ethnic group from that country. The revised rules provide guidance about when such terms should be removed. Other terms which may be considered offensive may still be retained if used by some of the people in question (e.g., “queer”). The second change to the editorial rules provides greater latitude for providing common forms of individuals’ names in the schedules. For example, at 951.93052 Administration of Kim Chŏng-ŭn, 2011-, there is now an index term for the common name of North Korea’s leader (Kim Jong-un), in addition to the form found in the Library of Congress Name Authority File.

The main business of EPC is the review of proposals for changes to the tables and schedules of the DDC. EPC 141 exhibits included proposals that will result in the following:

• An official option in the Introduction for prioritizing Indigenous groups in knowledge classification; this is the result of several years and discussions with Indigenous knowledge organization professionals.
• Clarification on how to class works about relations between two or more religions.
• Development for Orthodox Christian churches which makes clear how to express geographic notation for ecclesiastical jurisdiction vs. scope of the work; a new Manual note explains some of the complex structure of Orthodox churches and their implications for classification.
• Provision has been made for endangered languages and responses to language endangerment, both in the 400s and at 306.44 Languages for sociolinguistics.
• Updated language for transgender people and transgender identity, along with clear places in the schedules and tables for works about the LGBT community as a whole.
• Changes to the schedules for scouting organizations that enable expression of coeducational (boys and girls) scouting groups.
• The hierarchy of 629.2 Motor land vehicles, cycles will be updated to provide for autonomous vehicles, such as self-driving cars.
• Changes to the period tables under 871-878 Subdivisions for specific forms of Latin literature and 881-888 Subdivisions for specific forms of classical Greek literature that reduce the chances of building invalid numbers in WebDewey.

Finally, EPC requested more detail in a proposal that laid out an optional, chronological notation in the 200s with less emphasis on Christianity. This notation expands upon the option given in the Manual note 220-290 Optional arrangement for Bible and specific religions. We welcome any feedback on current use of, or interest in, this option.

As usual, after we’ve implemented a change in WebDewey, we’ll often make a blog post going into more detail. Stay tuned!

Numbers with Two Sets of Standard Subdivisions

From time to time you may have run across a Dewey number with two sets of standard subdivisions. For example:

• 470.01–470.09 Standard subdivisions of Italic languages vs. 470.1–470.9 Standard subdivisions of Latin
• 646.7001–646.7009 Standard subdivisions of management of personal and family life vs. 646.701–646.709 Standard subdivisions of grooming
• 947.0001–947.0009 Standard subdivisions of eastern Europe vs. 947.001–947.009 Standard subdivisions of Russia

You may be surprised to find out there are more than three dozen such standard subdivision pairs in Dewey. Most of them are found in the 400s, 800s, and 900s.

Up to this time, it has not been possible to distinguish between the members of these pairs in WebDewey’s number building engine. If you were adding standard subdivisions at 646.7, for example, the number building engine automatically assumed you wanted 646.7001–646.7009 Standard subdivisions of management of personal and family life because that span came first. If you wanted to use 646.701–646.709 Standard subdivisions of grooming instead, you would have to use Edit Local and the record for the resulting number would not show how the number should have been built, were it possible to build it correctly.

But now—ta da!—the number building engine will allow you to distinguish between the two sets of standard subdivisions. In these cases only, at the appropriate point in your number building, click and add the standard subdivision span you want. You will then be taken to the appropriate standard subdivision span. When you click and add a standard subdivision notation from this span, it will be added with the correct number of zeros.

Let’s consider three examples—one from the 400s, one from the 800s, and one from the 900s.

Example 1. How can we build 470.143 Semantics of Latin? We go directly to 470.1–470.9 and click Start:

This takes us to Table 4 Subdivisions of Individual Languages and Language Families, based on the note that notation from Table 1 is to be used as modified under T4—01–09:

From there we navigate to, and then add, T4—0143 Semantics:

This allows us to build the correct number:

When we click Save, we generate a correct and informative MARC 765 field (you can see the 765 fields in built number records by clicking MARC at the top of the WebDewey screen):

765 0# $b 47 $a 470.1 $c 470.9 $z 4 $s 0143 $u 470.143

Example 2. Our investigation here will focus on 840.01–840.09 Standard subdivisions of literatures of Romance languages vs. 840.1–840.9 Standard subdivisions; collections in more than one form; history, description, critical appraisal of works in more than one form of French literature. If we want to build 840.03 for encyclopedias of Romance language literatures, we navigate to 840.01–840.09 and click Start:

This takes us to Table 1 Standard Subdivisions:

Clicking T1—03, and then Add, gives us the desired number:

When we save this number, we get the following 765 field:

765 0# $b 84 $a 840.01 $c 840.09 $f 0 $z 1 $s 03 $u 840.03

What if instead we wanted to build the number for encyclopedias of French-language literature? This time we start with 840.1–840.9, which takes us to Table 3B—01–07 Standard subdivisions:

Since the standard subdivision we want to add is not modified under Table 3B, we navigate to T1—03 and add our standard subdivision from there:

When we save this number, we get the following 765 field:

765 0# $b 840 $a 840.1 $c 840.9 $z 1 $r 0 $s 3 $u 840.3

But if we want to build 840.8 or 840.9 or any of their subdivisions, we should navigate to the appropriate notation within the context of Table 3B and add that notation. For example, to build the number for collections of French literary texts about holidays we navigate to T3B—0801–0809 and click Add:

Following the directions there, we navigate to T3C—334 Holidays and add that notation:

This results in building the number 840.80334:

When we save this number, we get the following 765 fields:

765 0# $b 840.8 $f 0 $z 3B $a 0801 $c 0809 $z 3C $s 334 $u 840.80334

765 0# $b 840 $a 840.1 $c 840.9 $z 3B $r 0 $s 8 $u 840.8

Example 3. Now we look at building a standard subdivision number for Germany, from the span under 943.001–943.009, which we distinguish from standard subdivisions of central Europe from the span under 943.0001–943.0009. More specifically, we wish to build the number for the history of Turks in Germany. We begin by clicking Start at 943.001-943.009:

This takes us directly to the Table 2 notation for Germany, which we add:

This takes us, in turn, to the standard subdivisions in the add table under 930–990:

From here we add in turn 930-990:0041-0049, T5—943, and T6—9435, to give us 943.0049435:

When saved, the resulting 765s are:

765 0#  $b 943.004943 $z 5 $a 943 $z 6 $r 943 $s 5 $u 943.0049435

765 0#  $b 943.004 $a 930 $c 990 $w 930 $c 990 $y 1 $a 0041 $c 0049 $z 5 $s 943 $u 943.004943

765 0#  $b 943 $a 943.001 $c 943.009 $w 930 $c 990 $y 1 $t 004 $u 943.004

765 0#  $b 9 $a 943.001 $c 943.009 $z 2 $s 43 $u 943

Unfortunately, we are aware of a problematic set of circumstances, namely, when a 900 number is being built using the add table under 930–990 and the standard subdivision range with fewer zeros applies. There are three subcases. First, if the standard subdivision being added is special notation in the add table under 930–990 and or if it is built using an add note in that add table, everything should be fine; for example, consider what we have just seen in building the number for the history of Turks in Germany, which uses special notation 930–990:0041–0049. (Recall that standard subdivisions of central Europe are on three zeros at 943.0001–943.0009, thus making standard subdivisions of Germany at 943.001–943.009 the standard subdivision range with fewer zeros.)

Second, but what if we wanted to build the number for an encyclopedia of German history, i.e., 943.003, where notation 930–990:003 Dictionaries, encyclopedias, concordances is found in the add table, but it is not special notation, nor is it built using an add note in that add table? We begin by clicking Start at 943.001-943.009 and then add T2—43. After this we are given the chance to add from 930–990:001–009. If we then click 930–990:003, we get the correct number, but the 765 field will (appropriately enough) reflect that the 003 came from the add table under 930–990, when its source should be Table 1. (For help in determining when to use standard subdivisions notation in an add table and when to go straight to Table 1, see this previous blog post). We can get the correct number, but only at the expense of an incorrect 765 field.

The third subcase occurs when the standard subdivision being added is not special notation in the add table under 930–990, is not built using an add note in that add table, and doesn’t display as a single notation in that add table. For example, if we wanted to build the number for a journal of German history, we begin by clicking Start at 943.001-943.009 and then add T2—43. After this we are given the chance to add from 930–990:001–009. But the notation for journals occurs only as part of a range, 930–990:005–006. Under these circumstances, we have no choice but to navigate to T1—05 Serial publications. When we click and add T1—05, the result will include an extra zero, which must be corrected using Edit Local. This subcase also includes all the subordinate Table 1 notations not explicitly listed in the add table under 930–990 (e.g., T1—0202 Synopses and outlines, T1—083 Young people). Again, the only option is to navigate to the desired notation in Table 1 and to correct the number of zeros in the resulting number using Edit Local.

Nilo-Saharan languages and Nilo-Saharan peoples

At its Meeting 140, EPC approved subdividing Table 6 notation for Nilo-Saharan languages. The Nilo-Saharan languages constitute the last major group of African languages to be subdivided in DDC. According to Ethnologue, there are 207 Nilo-Saharan languages. There is literary warrant for subdividing T6—965 Nilo-Saharan languages, and literary warrant for separate numbers for subgroups of Nilo-Saharan languages, e.g., T6—9658 Songhai languages. However, most of the individual languages have little literary warrant. Only two specific languages now have their own numbers:

T6—9655226 Maasai

T6—9655842 Dholuo (Luo of Kenya and Tanzania)

 At 496.5 Nilo-Saharan languages are instructions to build schedule numbers for Nilo-Saharan languages and linguistics.  Here are the Hierarchy box and the Notes box for 496.5:

As the add note at 496.5  shows, all the new subdivisions of notation T6—965 can be used to build language and linguistics numbers, but notation from Table 4 can be added only for the two languages that have their own numbers.

Similarly, all the new subdivisions of notation T6—965 can be used to build literature numbers according to the add note at 896 African literatures, but notation from Table 3 can be added only for the two languages that have their own numbers.

Here are examples of languages and linguistics works for which the new numbers for Nilo-Saharan languages can be used:

A unified orthography for Kalenjin languages of Kenya: (Keiyo, Kipsigis, Marakwet, Nandi, Pokot, Sabaot and Tugen)

496.556 Kalenjin languages

[built with base number 496.5 plus 56 from T6—96556 Kalenjin languages]

Bilingual Dholuo-English dictionary, Kenya

496.55842321 Dholuo (Luo of Kenya and Tanzania)—bilingual dictionaries—English

[built with base number 496.5 plus 5842 from T6—9655842 Dholuo (Luo of Kenya and Tanzania) plus T4—3 Dictionaries of the standard form of the language plus T6—21 English as instructed at T4—32-39 Bilingual dictionaries. This dictionary has entry words in both English and Dholuo, but it is aimed at speakers of English, because the introduction and explanatory apparatus are only in English; the note at T4—32-39 indicates that such a dictionary should be classed with the language other than English, hence Dholuo. A Dholuo-English dictionary with entry words only in Dholuo is also classed in 496.55842321, e.g., Dholuo-English dictionary]

At T5—965 Peoples who speak, or whose ancestors spoke, Nilo-Saharan languages are instructions to build numbers for Nilo-Saharan peoples. Here are the Hierarchy box and the Notes box for T5—965:

Here are examples of works for which the new numbers for Nilo-Saharan peoples can be used:

Turkana herders of the dry savanna: Ecology and biobehavioral response of nomads to an uncertain environment

 305.8965522 Ethnic and national groups—Turkana (African people)

[built with base number 305.8 Ethnic and national groups plus notation T5—965522 as instructed at 305.81-305.89 Specific ethnic and national groups. Notation T5—965522 is built with base number T5—965 plus 522 from T6—965522 Lotuxo-Teso languages as instructed at T5—965. Notation T5—965522 has the Relative Index entry “Turkana (African people).” Notation T6—965522 has the including note: “Including Teso-Turkana languages” and the Relative Index entry “Turkana language.”]

Broken spears: A Maasai journey

305.89655226 Ethnic and national groups—Maasai (African people)

[built with base number 305.8 Ethnic and national groups plus notation T5—9655226 as instructed at 305.81-305.89 Specific ethnic and national groups. Notation T5—9655226 Maasai (African people) is built with base number T5—965 plus 5226 from T6—9655226 Maasai as instructed at T5—965.]

The updates for Nilo-Saharan languages and Nilo-Saharan peoples can be found in PDF form on the Dewey Services update page.

The First-of-Two Rule

Section 5.7 of the DDC Introduction indicates that a work on two subjects should be classed with the subject receiving fuller treatment.  But what about works in which the two subjects receive equal treatment?  In this case we invoke the first-of-two rule—but only if the rule of application, which takes precedence over other rules, doesn’t apply.  This rule instructs us to class such a work in the number coming first in the DDC schedules. 

Note that the first-of two rule does not instruct us to class the work in the number of the subject coming first in the title of the work.  Such an interpretation would make collocation an issue of whether all works on the two-subjects-treated-equally happened to name them in the same order in the title.  The first-of-two-rule also does not instruct us to class the work in the number of the subject coming first in the alphabet.  This would make collocation an issue of whether all languages name the two subjects so that they stand in a single fixed order.  In contrast, using the schedules as the basis for the first-of-two rule provides a mechanism whereby two-subjects-treated-equally will consistently be classed in the same number.

For example, given the first-of-two rule, works giving equal treatment to 782.26 Motets and 782.294 Psalms should be classed in the first of the two numbers, that is, in 782.26.  And, given the first-of-two rule, works giving equal treatment to 746.422 Knotting and 746.436 Tatting should be classed in the first of the two numbers, that is, in 746.422. 

Of course a work giving equal treatment to knotting and tatting is as relevant to tatting as it is to knotting.  Statements throughout this post about the number that the first-of-two rule instructs us to use should be understood to address the assignment of the standard DDC number, captured in the 082 field (Dewey Decimal Classification Number) of the MARC bibliographic record.  The number not chosen as the standard number should be considered for inclusion in the 083 field (Additional Dewey Decimal Classification Number).  Our work on knotting and tatting might then have the following fields added to its bibliographic record:

082         #4            $a  746.422 $2 23

083         #4            $a  746.436 $2 23

while our work on motets and psalms might have the following fields assigned:

082         #4            $a  782.26 $2 23

083         #4            $a  782.294 $2 23

As we saw in a follow-up post on the rule of application, sometimes the basic rules that govern the assignment of numbers in the DDC are built into its notes.  For example, consider a work on abstracting (025.41 Abstracting) and subject indexing (025.47 Subject indexing and cataloging), which gives the two subjects equal treatment.  By the first-of-two rule, such a work should be classed in the first of the two numbers, that is, in 025.41.  Application of the rule is reinforced in this context by the class-here note at 025.41, which states that comprehensive works on abstracting and subject indexing are to be classed in that number.  Another example can be found at 382.093–382.099 International commerce in specific continents, countries, localities.  Provision is made here for representing commerce between two geographic units by adding Table 2 notation for both of them, separated by an intervening 0.  If the work emphasizes one of the geographic units, its Table 2 notation is given first.  But “if emphasis is equal, give priority to the one coming first in Table 2,” which echoes the first-of-two rule.

Sometimes, however, notes are given that override the first-of-two rule.  Consider, for example, a work giving equal treatment to American literature (which is classed in 810 American literature in English) and British literature (which is classed in 820 English and Old English literatures).  By the first-of-two rule, such a work would be classed in the first of the two numbers, i.e., 810.  But at 810 we find the class-elsewhere note, “Class comprehensive works on American literature in English and English literature in 820.”  Another example arises with works giving equal treatment to historical bibliography, which is found in the class-here note of 002 The book, and analytical bibliography, which is classed in 010.42 Analytical bibliography (Descriptive bibliography).  By the first-of-two rule, such a work would be classed in the first of the two numbers, i.e., 002.  But at 002 we find the class-elsewhere note, “Class comprehensive works on historical and analytical bibliography in 010.42.” 

An exception to the first-of-two rule comes into play when the two subjects are the two major subdivisions of a broader subject, in which case a work giving equal treatment to the two subjects is to be classed in the number for the broader subject of which they are major subdivisions.  For example, a work giving equal treatment to dialectology (417.2) and historical linguistics (417.7) should be classed in 417 Dialectology and historical linguistics (and not in 417.2), because 417.2 and 417.7 are the two major (and indeed, the only) subdivisions of 417. 

Finally, what may seem like a subtle distinction needs to be drawn between treatment of two subjects, to which the first-of-two rule may apply, and two aspects of a single subject, to which preference notes and preference tables apply.  We have seen that classification of a work giving equal treatment to the two subjects, knotting and tatting, is governed by the first-of-two rule.  Consider by way of contrast a work on knotted rugs, a single subject with two aspects.  The one aspect is classed in 746.422 Knotting; the other aspect is classed in 746.7 Rugs.  If the first-of-two-rule applied (but it doesn’t), the work would be classed in 746.422, but the preference table under 746.1–746.9 gives priority to 746.7 Rugs over 746.4 Needlework and handwork.

 

Rule of Application, Part 2

 

Last week's post on the rule of application noted that this rule has been woven into the schedules of the DDC and promised this follow-up post with further examples.  In the meantime, Juli's post on recycling plastics concluded in this manner:

It should come as no surprise that works on recycling specific materials are classed according to the rule of application: recycling applied to plastics classed with plastics, recycling applied to a specific kind of plastic classed with the kind of plastic, recycling of specific kinds of wastes classed with specific kinds of wastes. . . .  Nevertheless, it is still necessary to check the Relative Index and notes to see exactly what DDC numbers should be used.

This post proceeds along two avenues.  We will start with two large-scale implementations of the rule of application in the schedules.  Then we will consider several recent developments in the schedules that have been driven by the rule of application.

One large-scale implementation of the rule of application is found in 610 Medicine and health with regard to the relationship between 615 Pharmacology and therapeutics and 616 Diseases.  This relationship is so crucial that the rule of application finds explicit statement in the schedules, even though it is standard operating procedure (pun intended!).  At 615.5 Therapeutics we find the following scatter class-elsewhere note:

Class therapies applied to a specific disease or group of diseases with the disease or group of diseases in 616–618, plus notation 06 from table under 616.1–616.9, notation 06 from table under 617, or notation 06 from table under 618.1–618.8, e.g., therapies for cardiovascular diseases 616.106

And at 615.7 Pharmacokinetics we find the following scatter class-elsewhere note:

Class use of a drug to treat a specific disease or group of diseases with the disease or group of diseases in 616–618, plus notation 061 from table under 616.1–616.9, notation 061 from table under 617, or notation 061 from table under 618.1–618.8, e.g., drug treatment for diseases of liver 616.362061

Therefore, for example, works on the treatment of arthritis using acupressure are classed in the number for arthritis (616.722 Arthritis) rather than in the number for acupressure (615.8222 Acupressure).  Numbers for diseases allow for addition of notation from the internal add table under 616.1–616.9, where we find 06 Therapy and subdivisions, including 062-069 Other therapies, with an add instruction to add the numbers following 615.8 in 615.82–615.89.  The specific number for treatment of arthritis using acupressure therefore is 616.72206222.

Another large-scale implementation of the rule of application is found in 780 Music.  This time the rule of application finds form, not as an explicit statement in a class-elsewhere note, but as an implicit effect of the class-with-the-last preference order that governs the 780s.  As pointed out in the Manual note for 780 Music, the usual arrangement or facet order in music is executant, form, general principles, and standard subdivisions.  We find executants in 782 Vocal music, 783 Music for single voices, and 784–788 Instruments and their music; it is useful for our purposes to note that these numbers are not only for the voices and instruments that produce music, but also for the music they produce.  We find musical forms that are executant-specific in the early numbers of their ranges (e.g., 782.1–782.4 Vocal forms, 784.18 [Instrumental] Musical forms) and those that are not executant-specific in 781.8 Musical forms.  We find general principles that are executant-specific in the earliest numbers of their ranges (e.g., 782.01–782.07 General principles of vocal music, 784.11–784.17 General principles of instruments and instrumental ensembles and their music) and those that are not executant-specific in, e.g., 781.1 Basic principles of music, 781.3 Composition, and 781.4 Techniques of music.  OK, so the class-with-the-last preference order implements the facet order (that is, executants come last, preceded by form, which in turn is preceded by general principles; and, as always, standard subdivisions come last), but what does this have to do with the rule of application?  It’s this:  processes and techniques that can be applied to music, e.g., composition, arrangement, performance, conducting, recording, are included in the general principles grab bag.  Therefore—after the lengthy prelude, do we now need a drum roll? (oops, inflicting punishment again)—processes and techniques applied to musical forms or to music-by-kinds-of-executants are classed with the forms or executants.  For example, works on the composition of fugues are classed in the number for fugues (784.1872 Fugues) rather than in the number for composition (781.3 Composition).  Numbers for specific musical forms allow for addition of notation from the internal add table under 781.2–781.8, where we find 1 General principles and an instruction to add the numbers following 781 in 781.1–781.7.  The specific number for composition of fugues therefore is 784.187213.

Now we turn to several examples, all involving computing, showing how the rule of application guides ongoing development of the DDC.  We note first that works on the application of computers to a subject are classed in the number for the subject followed by T1—0285 Computer applications, if appropriate.  Thus, when we relocated computational linguistics from 410.285 (Linguistics) Computer applications to 006.35 Natural language processing, it then became possible to express computational linguistics applications by adding T1—0285635, following the add instruction at T1—0285.  Consistent with the rule of application, works on the use of natural language processing / computational linguistics to accomplish certain tasks are classed with the task, plus notation T1—0285635.  Hence we get automatic abstracting 025.410285635 (025.41 Abstracting), word sense disambiguation 401.430285635 (401.43 Semantics), automatic part-of-speech tagging and automatic parsing 415.0285635 (415 Grammar of standard forms of languages), and machine translation 418.020285635 (418.02 Translating).

Questions on how to treat subjects like wireless Internet, wireless LANs, and wireless metropolitan networks were easily answered through the rule of application:  class in the number for the kind of network.  Therefore, wireless Internet is classed in 004.678, wireless LANs in 004.68, and wireless metropolitan networks in 004.67.

With DDC 23 additional concepts were incorporated into existing computer science classes.  Two of these were integrated development environments (IDEs) and application frameworks. Webopedia describes an IDE as "a programming environment integrated into a software application that provides a GUI builder, a text or code editor, a compiler and/or interpreter and a debugger."  So we had to decide whether to represent an IDE as a systems program (this is how interpreters, compilers, and assemblers are treated) or as an aid in programming (this is how application generators, text editors specially designed to assist in coding programs, and debuggers are treated).  Since the rule of application sided with the latter, "integrated development environments" was added to the class-here note at 005.1 Programming.  The pcmag.com encyclopedia characterizes an application framework as "a set of common software routines that provides a foundation structure for developing an application. Frameworks take the tedium out of writing all the program code for an application from scratch."  As with integrated development environments, the purpose of application frameworks is to support the development of programs.  The rule of application again leads to application frameworks being associated with 005.1 Programming, where "application frameworks" was also added to the class-here note.