Comments for ~ryanlowe/blogComments for ~ryanlowe/blogComment by Ryan- September 28, 2007 Patrick good points. It is true that complicated features often lead to complicated software to maintain. But "preventing the user from hanging themselves" in this case might result in more complicated code for me and more complicated usability for people. Too much hand holding in the usability and not enough flexibility. It's about balancing all of those things. I see tagging as being as complicated as people want it to be. Done liberally, tagging can be really simple and useful. As a...http://www.ryanlowe.ca/blog/archives/001612_tags_hierarchies.php#6353 Comment by Patrick D- September 28, 2007 This was the last paragraph of my previous post, and for some reason it was denied for containing "questionable content" until I removed this paragraph: Interesting discussion though. You could also look at what delicious did with hierarchies. I'm not sure exactly how it works, but I know I've seen some hierarchical-looking tags there.http://www.ryanlowe.ca/blog/archives/001612_tags_hierarchies.php#6352 Comment by Patrick D- September 28, 2007 I'm not sure I understand the distinction being made here between "categorization" and "tagging." As far as I know, in the PIM research literature at least, tagging is considered to be a way of categorizing (also known as classifying, the two terms are used interchangeably). Ryan, said: "it's not my job to prevent them from hanging themselves." First, I think that one of the great things about really well designed software is that is does prevent you from hanging yourself. Think of Perl and...http://www.ryanlowe.ca/blog/archives/001612_tags_hierarchies.php#6351 Comment by Ryan- September 28, 2007 You touched on at least two issues: 1. English is vague. There are lots of synonyms, like "Capri". The only way to tell is by context and trying to automate that in any way is a really really hard problem I'm not very interested in solving. My solution is to let individuals manage their taxonomies and use words in whatever context they choose. This doesn't mix well with other people's taxonomies though because the contexts are different, which leads to number... 2. Combining taxonomies...http://www.ryanlowe.ca/blog/archives/001612_tags_hierarchies.php#6350 Comment by Brad Mazurek- September 28, 2007 Although the tags mean something to the tagger, there is a value beyond that individuals selfish action. But it would seem to me that that value will really only arise after the number of tags has grown to a point where machines can start making inferences about the data. If I want to start a new website, and it services a niche but only has 500 users, why should the tags and taggings from sites like delicious and flickr be locked up there If by analyzing the tags on delicious and flickr I...http://www.ryanlowe.ca/blog/archives/001612_tags_hierarchies.php#6349 Comment by Ryan- September 28, 2007 Brad Recommending tags is something sites are doing well already, like delicious. I could certainly let people use tag hierarchies as well as recommend tags from a cumulative tag hierarchy and let the user decide whether to take the recommendation or not. If someone tags something with 'hockey', the implicit tag 'sport' could be recommended. When everyone has their own tag hierarchy, they can decide where to put the 'Capri' tag. --- engtech said: "...if you use your tags as categories...http://www.ryanlowe.ca/blog/archives/001612_tags_hierarchies.php#6348 Comment by Brad Mazurek- September 28, 2007 A single "correct" categorization is a bad thing. It implies that there is a single, correct world view. All other world views suffer from the tyranny of that categorization. An arbitrary set of categorizations speaks of the relationships between items. It can tell me if a particular tag "capri" refers to a car, the island or a pair of pants. How does making this semantic information or context results in a "right old mess" If I tag a tag with a number of GUIDs that allow me to quickly...http://www.ryanlowe.ca/blog/archives/001612_tags_hierarchies.php#6347 Comment by engtech- September 28, 2007 I think you're reinventing categories, not tags. "Categorizing is like taking all of your socks and putting them into drawers based on colours. Tagging is like sewing a little label on your socks that says when you bought them, how to wash them, and if lost please return to the dude with the fat cat. Categories add organization and tags add semantic information. A category can be a tag, but if you use your tags as categories youll eventually have a right old...http://www.ryanlowe.ca/blog/archives/001612_tags_hierarchies.php#6345 |