Dani You might look into WordNet, which is used by a great many folk for language analysis. It takes the form of a network and so can be used to impose a hierarchy (or net) on tags. I suspect your idea has been tried before -- it's a good one -- but I didn't find evidence on a quick google scan. I did find a project that is the reverse of your suggestion: it automatically tags texts: http://books.google.com/books?id=Rehu8OOzMIMC&pg=PA203&lpg=PA203&dq=wordnet+tags&source=bl&ots=IpgbKhXUj8&sig=pBxXrvovgjiIb6kWeIDCTOJ2FCU&hl=en&ei=p5y-TdjfLdOjtgfe7sjkBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CGAQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=wordnet%20tags&f=false
Best, Jared Jared On May 1, 5:19 pm, Dani Zobin <danizo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > A word of introduction: I came to Tiddly recently, during my search of a > better tool to organize my content, which is usually text related > to diverse areas. > So this is what I'm after more than everything: effective ways to organize > unstructured content. > I basically feed very good about Tiddly for this aim. > > And to the topic. > > I'm sure many of us are coming originally from a background of folders and > files to organize their content. > Than, one day you figure out: this piece of content is related to more than > only one category. And my data model (directories tree) is not expressive > enough to reflect this fact. > Than tags step in - you can tag a piece of content by many tags. If it only > belongs to one - than great, tag it with only one tag. And here we have a > more expressive data model. Great. > > But (!) on the way we lost something important . Hierarchical structure > hides from us the vast majority of our content, exposing on each step only a > small part of relevant content. This follows one of our biggest natural > cognitive limitations: *attention*. > > *Tags, in the traditional form,fail to do so*. You have all your tags at one > big pile. > > The idea of tags cloud tries to handle this problem, by showing the most > used tags bigger. But this is a statistical categorization, not conceptual > So here is a claim: we need a way to powerfully categorize tags themselves > as well. And, be able to select them by categories whenever needing to > specify a tag (when searching by tag or > when applying a tag) > > I'll suggest here an initial list of requirements for a feature that follows > the thoughts above > > *- Be able to categorize existing tags, by applying other tags (already > possible in Tiddly) [example: apply the tag "vehicle" on the tag "car"]* > *- When applying a tag, be able to create a new tag under an existing tag > [example: create the tag "subaru" under the tag "car" (that himself is > tagged by vehicle). Later, we'll be able to apply also "Japanese products" > on "subaru" but in the time of creation it will be probably apropriate to > limit categorization to one parent tag]* > * > * > *In two situations we need to specify tags, and this search for tags: when > applying a tag, when filtering by a tag* > *In this situation we need to be able to search for tags, exactly as we're > searching for content. Namely: by textual search - i.e. auto complete (a > plugin for this by Udo already exists) and by tags* > *So if I want to search info about a car that I recently saw and don't > remember the brand, I will type (or better be also able to use a GUI): > tags:car [here a dropdown will appear with all tags that are themselves > tagged by car, i.e. brands of cars] and I can now choose: only filter by the > main category - car, or continue and choose a subtag: Subaru. * > * > * > *Whenever a Tidler is tagged by a tag, it will be automatically tagged also > by all parent tags. So when tagging a tiddler by Subaru, it'll be > automatically tagged also by "car" and by "Japanese product". (This can be > implemented at the time of tagging, or at the time of retrieval. Should be > transparent to the user.) * > * > * > Some more general thoughts: > > Personally I feel that rarely more than 2 levels of hierarchy will be > needed. Maybe 3. But this 2-3 level are absolutely needed. I felt this need > many times since I started to insert content into my Tiddly some week ago > > My guess is that many may not feel strongly the need for the above, because > they don't use so much tags. > However, in my opinion, there is a great chance, that those people would > use much more tags, IF they had an efficient way to order and retrieve > them. > And more tags used is more captured meaning, and better abilities of > retrieval. I.e. more chances that you'll actually use what you wrote. > > Hey guys, I hope for a positive resonance, for this post of mine. > I feel this is a key point, go ahead and share you thoughts. > > Dani > > P.S > > Generally I'm a web developer, and even if more server side oriented, I have > some experience also with JS and JQuery. > If my excitement with Tiddlly will continue to be at high level it currently > is, there is a good chance that I'll jump one day into the wagon of Tiddly > development. > I'm not sure however how soon my time will allow this > So for now I'm throwing this idea here into the group, in order for it to > start getting feedback and resonating with other peoples minds. I'll for > sure be very glad if someone likes it enough to implement -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
