> > Thus, to use categories for an image filtering system would indeed > require constructing a category for the specific purpose of exclusion. > Big ALA "actually, that *is* censorship" alarm goes off.
This is true, and I agree. but... > * The category system is constructed of minute subcategories, not > broad categories that are then combined. > > You could then say "this and everything under it." But then you run into: > > * The category system is not very consistent. > * The category system is not free of loops. > * An image on en:wp could be a local image (one system of categories) > or a Commons image (a completely different system of categories). > This is largely an engineering problem; and it can probably be overcome with some architecture work. As we are going to be implementing a major new feature *anyway* it's not something to reject outright, I think :) Obviously given the complexity of the category tree system any such engineering wouldn't be infallible - but you could match it to most use cases. Ultimately it is just a collapsing tree problem, and they are ten a penny to a decent engineer :) Tom _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
