I have to absolutely agree, the tag names are just labels, I don't really see the point to give them names unless your working style is extremely static/restricted, and even then, it is just matter of having your own conventions, the name is irrelevant.
Best wishes uriel P.S.: I must say I'm not sure I see the value of being able to display more than one tag at the same time. On 9/17/07, Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I just wanted to let you know how I use tagging in dwm. > > By default, dwm comes with a fixed set of 9 numeric tags. > They are defined at compile time, because dwm > provides no way to create a new tag or to remove an unused tag > during runtime. > > The amount of 9 distinct tags seems to provide a sufficient > number of distinct symbols you can remember. Usually there are > up to 6 unused tags. Only in very rare scenarios I ended up > with 7 tags in use, e.g. when heavily working in a multi-hosted > development environment. > > When thinking about how to predefine tag names I'm > going to use, I regularly concluded that those names are > misleading, wrong or simply feel too unflexible. For instance, > when I choosed something like "net", "local", "work", > "misc", "www", "mail", "irc" as my tag set, I regularly > ended up with terminals editing a local file with the > tags "net" and "work", a terminal with editing a remote > file tagged with "local" or "www", etc. > > So what I noticed is, that I use tagging in a more fluent way > with nearly no semantic meaning of the tag names on their own. > It won't matter for me if the tags would be a, b, c, d, e, f, g, > h, i instead of 1, 2, 3, - or just chess figures, skat > figures or even some small icons. I only need a certain number > of distinct keys to use tagging. > > That way, I also don't need to retag a window when its semantic > context changes (e.g. when ssh'ing to a different box or just > editing a mail). Whenever I notice that I got too much windows > in my view, I additionally tag those windows I want to > concentrate on further with the next free tag and bring that in > view. So I can switch between two sets, the current context and > the context I want to concentrate on very easy - and without > misleading tag names which would enforce some special meaning. > Usually the last used tag is the set I concentrate on. The > previous ones are of a more global or misc scope. > > Well that's not totally true, I got used to the exception that > my browser windows end up tagged with 3, maybe I will change > that someday, to have at least for browser windows a semantic > www tag - which is the only real non-terminal app I heavily use. > > Besides this, dwm provides the ability to view more than a > single tag at a time, you can view all tags alltogether to bring > all existing windows into view. So this might be a reason for > the more fluent use of tags in dwm than in wmii, but this thesis > might be wrong. > > Regards, > -- > Anselm R. Garbe >< http://www.suckless.org/ >< GPG key: 0D73F361 > >
