Anil Gangolli wrote:
I wasn't suggesting that people define both tags and categories.
In my view, membership of an entry in a category would be entirely
dynamic. One wouldn't specify the category when writing the entry,
only the tags. The categories would just be defined as search
filters on the tags, so membership would be automatic. I would use
the tags "java" and "tips" and elsewhere (and just once) I could have
defined a category "Java Tips" = "java"+"tips".
i like that, but i also think we still need manual categories. there's
still plenty of reasons why users would want to manually place entries
in categories rather than relying on tags alone.
One can also view this as a category "folder" whose contents are
determined dynamically by a filter. In an earlier message, I
described the idea of supporting hierarchical categories as search
filter conjunctions as well. "java/tips" = "java" + "tips" =
"tips/java" depending only on how you want to organize the "folders,"
but you never actually have to recategorize entries; they keep the
same tags.
i'm not sure i really see how the intersection of 2 tags makes a
subfolder. to me, hierarchy requires a strict parent/child
relationship, and tags don't really offer that. i can see from your
example how you could make them seem like subfolders, but i'm not that's
an accurate way to represent the data structure.
As you say, it is possible to consider the saved search filter as a
bookmark instead of as a category (or in addition). The main
difference is that bookmarks aren't normally a container concept so
you can't very natually nest them in hierarchies. (You can put
bookmarks into folders, but a bookmark doesn't contain other
bookmarks.) If one doesn't want to support hierarchical categories
however, viewing saved tag filters as bookmarks works very well.
i guess what i am wondering is ... how exactly are you planning to use
tags in a hierarchical way? i don't see why "java/tips" as a subfolder
is different from "java+tips" as a bookmark.
-- Allen
--a.
Allen Gilliland wrote:
On Sun, 2005-10-02 at 00:26, Anil Gangolli wrote:
Allen Gilliland wrote:
Maybe we can create something like a "saved tag searches", which
allows a blogger to save certain tag combinations and give it a
name and then reuse that list on their blog somewhere. Basically
it would be the same as a bookmark folder, except that all the
bookmarks would reference pages of tag combinations for their blog.
Yes! The idea of a "saved tag search" labelled as a category is
what I've been trying to convey all along. I must really be getting
bad at expressing myself. I think we are on the same page now.
cool. so i guess my follow up question to this is where should this
"saved tag search" ability really be stored? should it be a "smart"
category? or a special kind of bookmark?
i can see the reason to want to save it as a category, but to me that
is also slightly problematic because people manually assign
categories when they are publishing an entry. so there is obvious
redundancy if the category "Java Tips" is assigned to a new entry
that is tagged with "java" and "tips". would "smart" categories not
be like a normal category that you assign an entry to?
i am thinking that a "saved tag search" is actually more like a
bookmark. then like we do with blogroll we can provide a special
macro that would list your saved tag searches with links to the pages
and rss?
-- Allen
--a.
