Introduction

Since the 20th Edition (1989), print versions of the full DDC have constituted four volumes. A typical arrangement of a printed DDC is as follows:

• • Volume 1. The first volume begins with the prefatory and introductory material, including the Introduction, a sort of operational manual to the DDC. This volume also includes the Manual and six auxiliary tables. In printed editions 20–23, Volume 1 was typically smaller than the rest; in the print-on-demand (PoD) publications, the volumes are more equally sized. Consequently, PoD versions also include the first two main classes (000–199).

• • Volumes 2–3. These two volumes are exclusively devoted to the schedules of classes. The schedules are arranged in numerical order and the section number of three digits is always printed twice at the left and right top of every page, facilitating scanning of the schedules by class numbers instead of just page numbers. The schedules are in the form of entries, with a class number on the left and its right a caption, i.e. the verbal content of the number. Hierarchical relations among subjects are shown on the left by the length of the class number and the shifting of indentation of the captions to the right. Under many of the class numbers, there are a variety of notes of explanations and instructions. These notes are essential to assign and build correct and consistent class numbers. In editions 20–23, Volume 2 featured classes 000–599; in the PoD, 200–599. Volume 3 has remained constant, with classes 600–999 since 1989.

• • Volume 4. The Relative Index (see Chapter 15).

Types of entries

All the approximately 40,000+ entries in the schedules may be divided into six categories:

• 1 Ordinary entries

• 2 Unusable headings

• 3 Unassigned numbers

• 4 Optional entries

• 5 Hook numbers

• 6 Centered headings.

Ordinary entries

The majority of the entries in the schedules are ordinary entries: a number with a corresponding heading which may or may not have notes or instructions. These can be directly applied to relevant works. Unusable headings

As a consequence of revision, a class may be relocated to some other place, or otherwise discontinued. In such cases, part of the number is enclosed within square brackets, e.g. 296[.06] Organizations and management [of Judaism]. Such numbers have instructions directing a classifier where to class works that otherwise might have gone there.

Introduction

The work of practical library classification, in essence, is to find an appropriate place for a document in the overall scheme of subjects in a given classification system. It is based on the subject content of the documents, though classification is more than content analysis and coding. Practical classification consists of two phases:

• 1 Subject analysis – the intellectual work of determining the specific subject of the document; and

• 2 the mechanism of assigning the appropriate class number from the schedules for the subject and doing number building, if required.

These two phases can be likened respectively to medical diagnosis and the prescription and dispensing of medicine. Subject analysis is the most important in the process and indeed the very essence of classifying, somewhat independent of the knowledge organization system used. A mistake at this stage will invariably percolate to produce wrong results. Determining the specific subject of a given document is an art which machines cannot do – or at least not yet. It is an intellectual work of the highest order, done by experts in the Idea Plane according to S. R. Ranganathan's theory (Satija, 2014). It sometimes requires intuitive insights which come from a wide acquaintance with knowledge and written literature. Such knowledge constantly improves with reading and experience, though one may never gain perfection in this art. Proficient classifiers know something about almost everything. Indeed, intense specialization in research and rapidly advancing frontiers of knowledge have made this task more daunting, though by no means impossible.

Determining the specific subject

The specific subject of a document may be determined by examining its title, subtitle, blurb, preface and table of contents and scanning through the text, if necessary.

The institutional affiliation of the author, the index, the series and cited references may also provide valuable clues. A classifier may occasionally read published reviews or consult some reference tools to understand the publication under consideration. If all these efforts fail, the last resort is to consult a subject expert.

Title as a subject indicator

The title is the proper name given to a publication. It is supposed to clearly indicate the subject of a nonfiction work. Often it will do so, but not always. Ideally, it will concisely indicate the subject of the document. We categorize titles into three kinds.

Introduction

Table 3 is mostly used in the Main Class 800 Literature and like most auxiliary tables, should only be used where instructed. In fact there is no Table 3 as such. It is really a series of three tables, labeled 3A, 3B and 3C. The table was first introduced, along with other tables, in the 18th Edition (1971). Since then, it has considerably eased the number-building process in the 800s, which has always been considered a problematic area to some extent. The 19th Edition split Table 3 into 3A and 3B and the 20th Edition introduced 3C.

Number building in the 800s is as interesting as it is challenging. Not only does it require acute subject analysis, but it is also a highly faceted class, requiring different citation order in different situations. The full play of facet analysis and the versatility of synthesis can be seen in the works by or about more than one author. The split into three sub-tables certainly helps with facet analysis and synthesis of numbers. The depth of classification is amazing here.

The Main Class 800 literature has been structured as shown in Figure 11.1 on the next page. The three sub-tables are used as follows:

• • T3A lists broader literary forms applicable only to works by or about individual authors.

• • T3B consists of standard subdivisions, literary forms and their subgenres such as poetry, odes, didactic poetry, short stories, science fiction, etc., to which the facets of anthologies, history, or critical studies can be added.

• • T3C is about themes in literatures, or literature by or for different types of people. It mostly depends upon T3B for use. Independently it is also used in 808–809 and at places in 700 Arts.

Using Table 3A

The simplest of the three, Table 3A is applied to the works of individual authors: both works by an individual author and works about an individual author. In number building, such works are permitted only three facets: language, form and period, in that order. Even standard subdivisions are not added here. The facet formula is: base + form (T3A) + time period.

The base number comes from Main Class 800 embedded with the language of the literature in which the author wrote. A combination of Main Class digit 8 and the language digits constitute the compound facet known as the base number.

Universal Decimal Classification (UDC)

By the late 1880s, the fame of the DDC had spread far and wide outside the USA, especially after the first international conference of librarians ever held, in London in 1877. Melvil Dewey ‘puck-like put a girdle round the world with his damned dots … and with him library methods were carried from Albany to Antipodes’ recorded Ernest A. Savage (1877–1966), a famous public library movement leader in the UK. In 1884 two Belgians, Paul Otlet (1868–1944), a lawyer and Henri La Fontaine (1854–1943), the 1913 Nobel laureate for peace, conceived the idea of a ‘universal index to recorded knowledge’. They established the International Institute of Bibliography (IIB) and organized in 1895 a world conference on bibliography. This is considered the birth of documentation science, which reached its peak in the 1930s. The IIB later became the International Institute for Documentation (IID) and ultimately the International Federation for Documentation and Information, which closed down in 2000 due to financial problems after playing a historic role in the development of documentation, special and international librarianship. The aim of the IIB was to systematically compile a universal bibliography of extant world literature in every language. They came across the DDC and successfully sought permission of Melvil Dewey to use, extend and adapt it to suit their monumental bibliography, which grew to 12 million references by 1921 before being abandoned as a utopian task. (It may be mentioned that a few years later Dewey would deny such permission to the Library of Congress to adapt his scheme: take it as such, or leave it; do not tinker with it, was his curt response). With permission based on the fifth edition (1884) of the DDC obtained, the system was expanded, endowed with auxiliaries and other powerful synthetic equipment to represent multiple aspects ofmicro-literature. The system was officially published in three languages – French, German and English, in that order.

First issued in French as Manuel du Repertoire Universal Bibliographique in 1895, the first full edition appeared in French in 1905. The second Edition, again in French, was published during 1927–1933 under the title Classification Decimale Universelle (CDU). The third in German and fourth in English were begun in 1933 and 1936, respectively. The English edition, published in specialized subject fascicules, took about half a century, mostly due to warrelated interruptions.

• 1. Melvil Dewey (1851–1931) was born on December 10, 1851; Melville Louis Kossuth Dewey was his original name.

• 2. The DDC was first published in 1876 under the title A Classification and Subject Index for Cataloguing and Arranging the Books and Pamphlets of a Library. It was published by Amherst College, Massachusetts. Authorship was anonymous.

• 3. The Second Edition (1885) is important because:

  • (a) It was given a new and stable title: Decimal Classification and Relative Index.

  • (b) It was copyrighted by the Library Bureau, a company owned by Melvil Dewey.

  • (c) It was eleven times larger than the First Edition.

  • (d) W. S. Biscoe (1853–1933), a friend of Dewey, was associated with editing this edition.

  • (e) The class numbers were expanded beyond three digits, which demonstrated for the first time the potential of the decimal notation.

  • (f) Tables of form divisions were added before each class for the first time, which ultimately developed into Table 1, for standard subdivisions.

    It was a first step in number synthesis.

  • (g) The ‘Integrity of Numbers’ policy was announced, which has influenced the revision of all subsequent editions. It has divided the DDC editors and other stakeholders into two camps, one observing the integrity of numbers policy in letter and spirit and the progressive camp, which wants the DDC to observe subject integrity to keep pace with growing knowledge and faithfully represent that knowledge in its classes.

• 4. Decimal Classification and Relative Index was the title from the Second (1885) to 12th Edition (1927). The name ‘Dewey’ was prefixed to this title in the 13th Edition (1932), published a year after Melvil Dewey's death.

• 5. Major contributions of the DDC to library classification include:

  • (a) It introduced classification by discipline.

  • (b) It provides relative location on the shelves in contrast to fixed location of books in the pre-Dewey days.

  • (c) Use of decimal numbers provides a hierarchical notation.

  • (d) It offers almost infinite capacity to add new subjects through the use of decimal notation.

  • (e) Numerous number-building facilities are available, making it basically an enumerative classification.

  • (f) There are regular and thoughtful revisions vetted by a formulated committee and editors, with strong institutional backup and sound revision machinery.

  • (g) The availability of DDC class numbers through centralized agencies such as WorldCat and LC MARC records is a great help to catalogers.

The preceding list gives years of formal affiliation with DDC editorial work, whether via Forest Press, the Library of Congress, or OCLC. Biographies of chief editors are given in the next appendix.

The dates do not necessarily equal the full span of a person's involvement with the DDC (e.g. EPC membership, consulting and volunteer work).

Introduction

Notwithstanding the many provisions and devices for the synthesis of numbers in the DDC, it is still often impossible to provide a class number covering all facets and aspects of a document. Take, for example, the title Cataloging in Academic Libraries. For this complex subject, class numbers exist separately for Cataloguing (025.3) and Academic libraries (027.7), yet these cannot be integrated through notation. One must be chosen. Similarly, a book on homeopathic medicine for heart disease will have to be placed either among Homeopathy (615.532) or Heart diseases (616.12). There is no provision to provide a class number covering both aspects. Furthermore, there may be books on composite subjects such as ‘libraries and museums management’, ‘introduction to physics and chemistry’, or ‘rudiments of electricity, electronics and magnetism’. Of these titles the class number can indicate no more than one subject. Why is this?

First of all, it should be remembered that any library classification, however synthetic, versatile and minute, cannot fully translate the subject of the document into notational symbols. The DDC has always been put forward as a system to group similar subjects, not one to individualize any bibliographic item by the class number alone. That is left to the call number (Satija, 2020). In fact no library classification can do this, notwithstanding the claims of stalwarts like S. R. Ranganathan, who projected classification as translation (Ranganathan, 1967). There cannot be a faithful translation of the subject of the document into notation. At best it is mere representation of the subject summary or dominant theme of the work. What then do we do in such cases? Which aspect of a subject do we represent and which do we ignore or suppress in the class number? This will depend upon the following:

• • the author's intention and emphasis (which are sacrosanct)

• • the local situation in the library (strong and weak areas in collection)

• • library policy regarding classification (broad vs close classification)

• • library policy regarding cataloging and indexing (cross references, number of subject headings);

• • the rules and instructions for this purpose in the Manual and notes and guidance in Merrill's Code (1939).

Introduction

The central conceit of the DDC is that any given concept or topic has one correct number. Notes, tables of preference and other devices help guide choices between numbers which seem equally suitable. Where a classifier assigns a different number, we could fairly call this a mistake. But the DDC is a universal system, used worldwide. Not all communities organize knowledge in the same way. Any library or other institution using the DDC may choose to deviate from standard DDC if doing so better serves their users.

There is an inherent trade-off to such practices, in that local alterations lessen mutual compatibility with other institutions, even as they better serve local users. The DDC's Introduction speaks to this:

There are no ‘Dewey police’ that will come and reprimand any library that deviates from standard practice, but any library considering local notation should understand the implications of doing so.

Nevertheless, even standard DDC includes ‘official’ options, which chart a middle ground between unaltered DDC and completely local practices. Numbers from these options will be more readily comprehensible by other institutions, since they are described in the classification itself.

This chapter will examine the DDC's official options and discuss further local adaptations. For clarity's sake, ‘option’ in this chapter will always mean the official options and ‘local adaptations’ practices that go beyond anything spelled out in the classification; ‘alterations’ will refer to either or both of these together. ‘Local’ in the context of this chapter does not always mean one library and may refer to a group of similar libraries, perhaps even up to a national level in some cases.

Rationale

The DDC has a global user base and users from around the world participate in its development. Today, all development of the DDC has the aim of being the most useful classification system possible regardless of local context. But this necessarily means not all local priorities can be represented in standard notation.