On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 7:25 AM, Platonides <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If we're going to end up with hundreds of categories on each page, why
> not make the software automatically add all parent categories?
> It would fill the categorylinks table*, but it would as well by manually
> adding them.
> It would also require forcing the categories to be a graph and maybe
> limiting the number of parent categories, as to reduce a bit how
> expensive category position changes can be. But, if we leave that to
> 'manual actions', the same actions would be performed by bots, leading
> to the same cost and partially less coherent structure.
[snip]

Because adding the parents produces non-sense results because
"categorization" is a flawed concept except at the most fuzzy and
course levels: Reality doesn't fit into neat nested boxes (not even
the N-dimensional ones created by multiple parentage).  The two
primary problems are semantic drift (the further away you get from a
relationship the more not-quite-matching error accumulates), and
multiple link types (we use categories to describe different types of
membership, and while within a type the membership relation is
commutative among types it is usually not).  So with parentages you
get chains like [periodic table]->[hydrogen]->[hydrogen
compounds]->[water]->[places with water]->[beaches]->[beaches in
america]->[beaches of lalaville]->[lalavill
beach]->[Image:Ironmeteor_at_lalavill_beach.jpg]

Is an iron meteor a "beach in america" or a "hydrogen compound"? No.

Offering all the parents with an easy checkbox interface that allows
you quickly adopt all that apply would be great, but forcing their
inclusion would produce rubbish.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to