VOTE: Tagging Proposal

[Elias Torres-4]

Hi(gh) Rollers,

So we have this proposal on the table and we have been getting some
feedback (not enough) but some is better than nothing. I'm really
committed to make this happen in 3.1 and would like it to be the big
feature for that release. I mean that since this proposal affects enough
of the code base, I'd rather reduce the number of big changes for this
release leave other big proposals for 3.2 or a branch. Alternatively, I
could work in a branch if other proposals are more urgent for 3.1.

Could we vote so I can start working in trunk? This would help me a lot
because I could just say to Dave: please update and help me fix this
weird bug I'm having. :)

http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_WeblogTags

-Elias

[Dave-401]

+1 to committing work and working out of trunk.

- Dave



On 9/19/06, Elias Torres <elias@...> wrote:

> Hi(gh) Rollers,
>
> So we have this proposal on the table and we have been getting some
> feedback (not enough) but some is better than nothing. I'm really
> committed to make this happen in 3.1 and would like it to be the big
> feature for that release. I mean that since this proposal affects enough
> of the code base, I'd rather reduce the number of big changes for this
> release leave other big proposals for 3.2 or a branch. Alternatively, I
> could work in a branch if other proposals are more urgent for 3.1.
>
> Could we vote so I can start working in trunk? This would help me a lot
> because I could just say to Dave: please update and help me fix this
> weird bug I'm having. :)
>
> http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_WeblogTags
>
> -Elias
>
>

[Allen Gilliland-3]

+1 from me as well.  i think we are still ironing out a few things on
the proposal, but there is no reason not to work out of the trunk.

-- Allen


Dave wrote:

> +1 to committing work and working out of trunk.
>
> - Dave
>
>
>
> On 9/19/06, Elias Torres <elias@...> wrote:
>> Hi(gh) Rollers,
>>
>> So we have this proposal on the table and we have been getting some
>> feedback (not enough) but some is better than nothing. I'm really
>> committed to make this happen in 3.1 and would like it to be the big
>> feature for that release. I mean that since this proposal affects enough
>> of the code base, I'd rather reduce the number of big changes for this
>> release leave other big proposals for 3.2 or a branch. Alternatively, I
>> could work in a branch if other proposals are more urgent for 3.1.
>>
>> Could we vote so I can start working in trunk? This would help me a lot
>> because I could just say to Dave: please update and help me fix this
>> weird bug I'm having. :)
>>
>> http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_WeblogTags
>>
>> -Elias
>>
>>

[Andrei Filimonov]

Hello Elias,

Did you consider combining categories and tags into one system by using namespaces? This way you could have something like:
global:<tag name>              tags defined globally at the website level
<blog name>:<tag name>   tags defined at the blog level by the blog owner (formerly known as categories)
my:<tag name>                  personal tags defined at the user profile level
<group name>:<tag name> just in case people want to share personal tags

Andrei

Elias Torres wrote:

Hi(gh) Rollers,

So we have this proposal on the table and we have been getting some
feedback (not enough) but some is better than nothing. I'm really
committed to make this happen in 3.1 and would like it to be the big
feature for that release. I mean that since this proposal affects enough
of the code base, I'd rather reduce the number of big changes for this
release leave other big proposals for 3.2 or a branch. Alternatively, I
could work in a branch if other proposals are more urgent for 3.1.

Could we vote so I can start working in trunk? This would help me a lot
because I could just say to Dave: please update and help me fix this
weird bug I'm having. :)

http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_WeblogTags

-Elias

[Elias Torres-4]

Hi Andrei,

I hadn't really considered what you are mentioning, but we already have
some of that namespacing functionality. For example, tags are associated
with a website id in the table. When we do blog/website tags we will
have another table for that. Using the prefix style of tagging in the db
introduces another level of complexity in the code such as parsing
strings when doing queries. Could you explain more of the benefits that
you see in your approach?

-Elias

Andrei Filimonov wrote:

> Hello Elias,
>
> Did you consider combining categories and tags into one system by using
> namespaces? This way you could have something like:
> global:<tag name>              tags defined globally at the website level
> <blog name>:<tag name>   tags defined at the blog level by the blog owner
> (formerly known as categories)
> my:<tag name>                  personal tags defined at the user profile
> level
> <group name>:<tag name> just in case people want to share personal tags
>
> Andrei
>
>
> Elias Torres wrote:
>> Hi(gh) Rollers,
>>
>> So we have this proposal on the table and we have been getting some
>> feedback (not enough) but some is better than nothing. I'm really
>> committed to make this happen in 3.1 and would like it to be the big
>> feature for that release. I mean that since this proposal affects enough
>> of the code base, I'd rather reduce the number of big changes for this
>> release leave other big proposals for 3.2 or a branch. Alternatively, I
>> could work in a branch if other proposals are more urgent for 3.1.
>>
>> Could we vote so I can start working in trunk? This would help me a lot
>> because I could just say to Dave: please update and help me fix this
>> weird bug I'm having. :)
>>
>> http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_WeblogTags
>>
>> -Elias
>>
>>
>>
>

[Andrei Filimonov]

Elias,

I guess the immediate benefit is to avoid having two parallel systems of tagging. This would complicate overall design. Categories are essentially tags associated with a blog id and created by the blog owner. In other words they are only different in scope and control - concepts that can be implemented using namespaces. And well ... unlike tags categories are hierarchical. But who said that that tags couldn’t be hierarchical 

In the longer run it will add flexibility to the way user categorize the content. In addition, by introducing tags at some point you will have to deal with closed taxonomy vs open-ended taxonomy issues. Having unified tagging system with namespaces may make the task a bit easier. Syndicating content that has categories and tags is another example (though it is a whole new discussion by itself).

On the implementation side, you are right that having prefixes in the database is not the best idea. There are multiple ways to implement namespaces. The simplest is to add a namespace field. Or you can create a namespace entity. It will complicate design a bit but give you ability to use namespaces on other things in Roller. After all, when you introduce namespaces there is no going back. We started with XML – a simple way to tag data. And look: now almost everything has a namespace.

Andrei

Elias Torres wrote:

Hi Andrei,

I hadn't really considered what you are mentioning, but we already have
some of that namespacing functionality. For example, tags are associated
with a website id in the table. When we do blog/website tags we will
have another table for that. Using the prefix style of tagging in the db
introduces another level of complexity in the code such as parsing
strings when doing queries. Could you explain more of the benefits that
you see in your approach?

-Elias

[Anil Gangolli]

Regarding tag-based categories, I've got an existing (idling) proposal for
tag-based categories
http://rollerweblogger.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=Proposal_TagBasedCategories .
I may pick it up again, but only after the tagging work is complete.

I don't understand the benefits in actual usage of namespaces in tags.  Most
of the useful semantic aspects seem to come from the expectation of them
being interpreted in a shared namespace.  How do users on the reading side
anticipate which namespace to use when searching?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrei Filimonov" <afilimonov@...>
To: <roller-dev@...>
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 6:56 AM
Subject: Re: VOTE: Tagging Proposal

>
> Elias,
>
> I guess the immediate benefit is to avoid having two parallel systems of
> tagging. This would complicate overall design. Categories are essentially
> tags associated with a blog id and created by the blog owner. In other
> words
> they are only different in scope and control - concepts that can be
> implemented using namespaces. And well ... unlike tags categories are
> hierarchical. But who said that that tags couldn?t be hierarchical ?
>
> In the longer run it will add flexibility to the way user categorize the
> content. In addition, by introducing tags at some point you will have to
> deal with closed taxonomy vs open-ended taxonomy issues. Having unified
> tagging system with namespaces may make the task a bit easier. Syndicating
> content that has categories and tags is another example (though it is a
> whole new discussion by itself).
>
> On the implementation side, you are right that having prefixes in the
> database is not the best idea. There are multiple ways to implement
> namespaces. The simplest is to add a namespace field. Or you can create a
> namespace entity. It will complicate design a bit but give you ability to
> use namespaces on other things in Roller. After all, when you introduce
> namespaces there is no going back. We started with XML ? a simple way to
> tag
> data. And look: now almost everything has a namespace.
>
> Andrei
>
>
> Elias Torres wrote:
>>
>> Hi Andrei,
>>
>> I hadn't really considered what you are mentioning, but we already have
>> some of that namespacing functionality. For example, tags are associated
>> with a website id in the table. When we do blog/website tags we will
>> have another table for that. Using the prefix style of tagging in the db
>> introduces another level of complexity in the code such as parsing
>> strings when doing queries. Could you explain more of the benefits that
>> you see in your approach?
>>
>> -Elias
>>
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/VOTE%3A-Tagging-Proposal-tf2302673s12275.html#a6546844
> Sent from the Roller - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>