On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Eben Eliason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Two") to get at the thing you're looking for. So, again, I'm not > sure that order really matters. > > Of course, if it DID really matter for a reason I'm not presently > considering, we could allow tags of the form: > > A/B > > To match on "A", "B", "A B" "B A", and also "A/B" (but not "B/A"). In > other words, the addition of the slash to the tag format is used > similarly to the way quotes are used to group two tags into one. > Instead of grouping, however, it orders instead. It's interesting, > but I'm not sure I see a good utility there yet.
I think there is compelling utility in terms of mapping tag space to a filesystem and back. I hope that (like quotes) there is not all that often when you need to use them -- but they are a useful power-user feature. The following are all related searches: A B -- matches these tag sets "A B C", "B A C", "A/B C", "B/A C", etc. A/B -- matches "A/B", "C/A/B", "A/B/C", etc. B/A -- matches "B/A", "C/B/A", "B/A/C", etc. "A B" -- matches "'A B' C", etc /A/B -- matches "A/B/C" but not "C/A/B" They express slightly different meanings, but in many cases will be indistinguishable from A B. I think they add a lot of power to the tag language, although naive users won't need to use it often. Completion on a search for "A/B" would suggest "A/B/C" if there is a 'subfolder' C; it would suggest "A/B C" if there was an item labelled with A/B and tag C. If a young user has never made subfolders, then the slash-separated options will never be suggested and all this power remains hidden. An interesting point Eduardo brought up was the relationship between "folders" and "saved searches". Do "tag completions" (ie "sub folders" or "related tags") show up in the journal itself, or only in a pane during a search? If they show up as first class objects, then it might be nice to have searches in general as first class objects. I think I'm arguing that "tag completions" are not the same thing as journal items, and only show up during a search. I could be convinced otherwise. Another interesting point: gmail's UI never lets you see the results of the 'empty' search (that is, all objects). By default the search is restricted to 'in:Inbox' and the easiest UI mechanisms always restrict the search to a 'folder'. You can click 'Search Mail' with an empty search query, though, and what you get is very similar to what one might imagine the Journal to be: a chronological list of all your email (activity instances), grouped by thread (version), with a list of clickable tags on each which you can use to find other similar emails (activity instances). Gmail does have a flexible 'rules' system to help automatically tag/categorize/file documents, though; it may be worthwhile thinking what the Journal could do in that regard. --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar