In November 2008, the National Library of Sweden decided to change their standard classification system from the Swedish Library Classification System (SAB) to the american Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). One of the main reasons to this transition was the assumption of gaining the possibility to exchange and import catalogue posts by using an outspread international classification system. Throughout the years, it has been disputed whether DDC’s treatment of music has been the most suitable. The system has been criticized for being biased in favor of Western music and not being updated with the growth of new music. The purpose of this study is to examine the opinions among librarians connected to the music area on how this classification transition went, and how it has affected their work. The primary questions concerned with this study are if the interviewees perceive that there is a problem by using DDC for music and if so, how? Additionally, does this change also affect the library users, or is it only the librarians? The method I am using to examine these questions is qualitative interviews based on Steinar Kvale and Svend Brinkmann’s thoughts in their book Den kvalitativa forskningsintervjun. The theories that will be used for this thesis are theories concerning functional requirements of classification systems. The results show that the interviewees’ opinions are that DDC’s notation tends to be long, which affects the usability of the system. The interviewees’ perception is that DDC is also lacking in its treatment regarding musical recordings and the popular music area. One of the main reasons for this shortage is because there is basically no other library outside of Sweden that is classifying such material with DDC, which means that the information exchange with countries abroad has so far been rather exiguous.

Introduction. The Apple shelf is an established concept at public libraries in Sweden. These shelves contain accessible books and other media for disabled people of varying ages. A recent discussion within the librarian profession challenges the name – is there a better alternative to “The Apple shelf”? Our study aimed to gather both librarian and target group opinions of the current name and its suggested alternatives, and attempts to understand potential stigmatization with the application of Goffmans stigma theory.      Method. A multimethod (triangulation) approach was applied to collect data. An online survey was sent to all public libraries in the regions of Västerbotten, Västmanland and Uppsala; semi-structured interviews were conducted with librarians, parents of disabled children, and a disabled youth accompanied by an aide; and an instance of participant observation was done in a network meeting setting. Recorded and transcribed interviews, survey responses, and meeting notes respectively formed the basis for the study’s analysis.  Analysis. A qualitative thematic analysis of the collected data found 4 common themes: (1) User and Target Group, (2) Name, (3) Shelf Arrangement, and (4) Awareness and Marketing. Goffman’s stigma theory was applied to each theme to highlight stigmatization risks related to both the existing name and proposed alternatives. Results. The Apple Shelf caters to a wider audience than originally intended. Both the current ”Apple Shelf” name and its proposed alternatives have advantages and disadvantages related to stigmatization.  Conclusion. Regardless of what name is chosen for Apple shelf it must be explained and marketed to the public. We argue that including disabled people in library changes, as well as actively updating and promoting the shelf locally, are more important than this change of name.     This is a two-year master’s thesis in Library and Information Science.