I would like to leave the door open for tags/labels to be used as folksonomies (just like we see in blogs, Confluence, JIRA, GMail, etc.). While tagging can surely be used as a means of categorizing (e.g., the way we tag tickets for our reporting sprint), they are not limited to that use.
If there needs to be a predefined pool of categories within which objects are grouped, then use "categories" (or, to follow convention, "types"). Assuming we can define tagging permissions at a granular enough level (i.e., by object) and control creation vs. usage with different permissions, then implementations could adjust permissions to meet their needs (admin-only-tagging-of-reports vs. anyone-can-tag-reports-but-only-with-tags-created-by-admins vs. anyone-can-tag-reports-with-anything like in JIRA). If we can meet all our needs with tagging, great; however, if we start programming in assumptions that tags can't be created on the fly by someone with the right permissions, then we're either losing the folksonomy options or creating tagging that will behave differently depending on where you are within the application. -Burke On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Michael Seaton <[email protected]> wrote: > ** > Thanks Burke, > > I agree that we are close - I like your suggestions, but I think we are > envisioning different use cases. My primary concern is not in supporting a > folksonomy, making it easy for users to create lots of tags on-demand, but > for administrators to create a well-defined set of categories that can be > used to better organize a library of metadata. I'm certainly not opposed > to have a nice, easy, and intuitive UI :), but I do want to make sure that > your use case of having doctors tagging their patients and my use case of > having a subset of reports categorized as "Data Quality Reports" should be > met by the same solution. As long as these goals overlap and don't clash > with each other, I'm happy. > > I would agree with Darius that supporting or not supporting on-the-fly > creation of tags seems like a UI concern, and may be something you want to > change depending on the user or the type of object being tagged. And > although I like your idea of having String-based API methods > (addTags(object, String[] tags), it is not 100% clear to me how this meshes > with our eventual support of localized tags - are the string names you pass > in for the user's current locale, the system default locale? I think I'd > rather we leave these methods off of the API for now until we figure out > whether it can be compatible with localization. > > I agree that tags should be unique. I don't think tags should be overly > restrictive as to what can be in the names, but I'm happy restricting the > use of things we commonly use as delimiters etc - namely commas, pipes, > semi-colons, dollar-signs, curly braces, and the like. I think spaces in > tags should absolutely be allowed. > > Thoughts? > Mike > > > > On 04/12/2012 04:25 PM, Burke Mamlin wrote: > > Okay. I think we're close. > > Do we really want tag creation and assignment to be distinct operations? > I would much rather let tags function as a folksonomy, created ad-hoc by > users to meet their needs than to have a pre-defined pool of tags that I > could use. For example, imagine if you could only use existing labels in > JIRA and, if you wanted to add a new one, you would have to go to a label > management page & define a new label before you could return to your ticket > to apply it. Yuck. While I suppose supporting basic CRUD for tags is > okay, the folksonomy approach would suggest API methods like addTag(object, > tag). > > Could the API be more supportive of tags as strings and provide methods > using Tag objects for sync operations? For example: > > String[] getTags(object); > addTags(object, String[] tags); > removeTags(object, String[] tags); > > // and then for the few (sync) who needed IDs or UUIDs > Tag getTagByName(String tag); > > > Instead, can we follow the conventions of Atlassian labels? > > - *Tag uniqueness is defined by the string value* (name in your > model). We can use id/uuid under the hood for synch support; however, you > should not be able to create two "foobar" tags with different id/uuid. > - In the database, we would make tag.name unique. > - If we ever add localization of tags, then the uniqueness would be > enforced within a locale and we would never show tags in multiple > locales > at once. > - *An object can have any number of tags, but cannot have duplicate > tags* (I think you meant this by your object_tag's unique constraint & > just forgot to change the word "definition" to "object"). > > Can tags have spaces in the names? Atlassian has chosen not to include > spaces to make their token input & creation easier (there's no ambiguity > whether "HIV anemia" is one or two tags (for Atlassian, it's always two > since spaces divide tags). On the other hand, I've seen JQuery token > input examples <http://loopj.com/jquery-tokeninput/> that allow for > spaces by using choice lists for tags, but I haven't seen one that combines > this with on-the-fly tag creation. I suppose you could use commas to > separate tags. > > Along the same line, what are the specs for a tag name – what are the > allowed characters & how long can they be? You've suggested 100 chars as > the max length, which is fine by me. Which characters are valid? If we > allow spaces, then we should probably reserve comma as a delimiter. Do we > want quotes or non-printable characters in tag names? It's probably better > to avoid over-restricting, but it's probably at least agreeing on some > restrictions (e.g., no comma, no backslash, no non-printable characters). > > Cheers, > > -Burke > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Michael Seaton <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Here is the approach I proposed on the ticket below (generalized for >> OpenMRS rather than specific to reporting). To answer your specific >> questions: >> >> >> *Are tags simple Strings or objects (with uuid? with id?)?* >> >> They are Objects (specifically OpenmrsMetadata), but can look like / act >> like Strings in practice (eg. in a UI). The main reason for making them >> metadata is so that they can sync between instances and so that we could >> potentially add a translation layer on top of them (eg. metadata >> localization). We could also add additional metadata around them like >> "these tags are appropriate for Locations. these are appropriate for >> Reports") >> >> >> *Can users (with permissions) simply create new tags are is tag creation >> separate from assignment?* >> >> Tag creation would be separate from assignment in this model. >> Permissions for tag creation and tag assignment would be distinct. >> >> * >> Do we need to support localization of tags? If so, who is translating >> them?* >> >> Yes. The same person will translate them as would translate any other >> piece of OpenmrsMetadata object (which is currently not possible, but would >> ultimately be done by an end-user in the UI). >> >> >> *Do we add tags as a property of OpenMRSObject?* >> >> We could do, but I would not imagine so. This can always be added later >> on if desired. For now, I am proposing a TagService which would allow you >> to get the tags for an Object on demand. >> >> *Design below:* >> >> >> Tag extends OpenmrsMetadata { >> Integer id; >> String uuid; >> String name; >> ... >> } >> >> tag ( >> id int(11) primary key, >> uuid char(38) not null, >> name varchar(100) not null, >> ... >> ) >> >> openmrs_object_tag ( >> openmrs_object_uuid char(38) not null, >> tag_id int(11) references tag.id >> >> unique key definition_tag_unique_key (definition_uuid, tag_id) >> ) >> >> TagService { >> >> List<Tag> getTagsForType(Class<? extends OpenmrsObject> type); >> List<Tag> getTags(OpenmrsObject object); >> >> // Standard crud methods >> Tag getTag(Integer id); >> Tag getTagByUuid(String uuid); >> List<Tag> getAllTags(); >> Tag saveTag(Tag tag); >> void purgeTag(Tag tag); >> } >> >> Mike >> >> >> >> >> On 04/12/2012 01:31 PM, Burke Mamlin wrote: >> >> +1000 for having at least some fundamental agreements on our approach >> to tagging (e.g., wiki page <https://wiki.openmrs.org/x/cgM3AQ> and >> TRUNK-2284 <https://tickets.openmrs.org/browse/TRUNK-2284>), so that we >> don't end up with dealer's choice on what tags mean across OpenMRS. There >> are many potential places for tagging through OpenMRS and modules. >> >> Can we discuss this on a design call or on this list? As long as we >> align on these things, we can change our minds later and have a clear path >> to refactor. >> >> - Are tags simple Strings or objects (with uuid? with id?)? >> - Can users (with permissions) simply create new tags are is tag >> creation separate from assignment? >> - Do we need to support localization of tags? If so, who is >> translating them? >> - Do we add tags as a property of OpenMRSObject? >> >> Cheers, >> >> -Burke >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Roger Friedman (Commented) (JIRA) < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Roger >>> Friedman<https://tickets.openmrs.org/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=r.friedman>commented >>> on [image: >>> New Feature] REPORT-49 <https://tickets.openmrs.org/browse/REPORT-49> >>> *Add a mechanism for tagging / categorizing reports and other >>> reporting elements* <https://tickets.openmrs.org/browse/REPORT-49> >>> >>> I agree that more translation mechanisms need to be available for >>> metadata. I was somewhat involved in the GSOC project. It tries to handle >>> translation within the existing data structures, but the result is that >>> text fields can no longer be sorted, I think problems like this are why it >>> hasn't been introduced even though it worked to specs. >>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA. >>> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA >>> administrators<https://tickets.openmrs.org/secure/ContactAdministrators%21default.jspa> >>> . >>> For more information on JIRA, see: >>> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira >>> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> > ------------------------------ > Click here to > unsubscribe<[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l>from > OpenMRS Developers' mailing list > > ------------------------------ > Click here to > unsubscribe<[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l>from > OpenMRS Developers' mailing list > _________________________________________ To unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list, send an e-mail to [email protected] with "SIGNOFF openmrs-devel-l" in the body (not the subject) of your e-mail. [mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l]
