Re: Early Drupal 6 review from Chris Messina

Khalid Baheyeldin wrote:

> >   vocabulary -> category group
>
> Two words would be confusing, especially if category is
used for term.
>
> How about just "category" here.
>
> >   term -> category or tag
>
>
> We can keep it as a term. The issue is the
"vocab", not so much "term". Tag
> is more specific to free tagging, and may be
overloading the term.

<sigh>

The problem is that everyone intuitively knows what a
category is.

If you have a term "dog" and you tag a post with
"dog", then that post goes
in to the category "dog". That's the common sense
non-technical meaning of 
"category". You can even stretch that to include
terms like "Gamer's Forum"
-- a post in the Gamer's Forum goes into the category
"Gamer's Forum".
That's what classification is all about, putting things into
categories.

Using "category" for anything else but for terms
will just not work for 
normal people without re-educating them about what that
common word means.
IOW, it will not work.


Now, what's that thing in between -- the "animals"
and the "forums" -- in 
plain English? Go ask the man in the street:
If you have categories like "dog",
"bird", and "elephant", then what would
you call that group of categories? Answer:
"animals"

Oops, answered my own question, the real one...

Hans

On Nov 14, 2007 7:05 PM, Hans Salvisberg <drupalsalvisberg.com> wrote:

> The problem is that everyone intuitively knows what a
category is.
>
> If you have a term "dog" and you tag a post
with "dog", then that post goes
> in to the category "dog". That's the common
sense non-technical meaning of
> "category". You can even stretch that to
include terms like "Gamer's Forum"
> -- a post in the Gamer's Forum goes into the category
"Gamer's Forum".
> That's what classification is all about, putting things
into categories.
>
> Using "category" for anything else but for
terms will just not work for
> normal people without re-educating them about what that
common word means.
> IOW, it will not work.
>
>
> Now, what's that thing in between -- the
"animals" and the "forums" -- in
> plain English? Go ask the man in the street:
> If you have categories like "dog",
"bird", and "elephant", then what would
> you call that group of categories? Answer:
"animals"

They may know it intuitively, but at just what level does it
apply?

Why would "dog" be the category?  To me, the
category (the container)
is "animals" -- and "dog" and
"bird" are things, or instances of
things which go into the category "animals".

English is flexible that way -- we are actually both right. 
And thus,
we don't know what any particular user is going to think
when they see
the word "categories".  Are they going to think
animals, plants and
minerals?  Or dogs, birds and elephants?

Quoting Chris Johnson <cxjohnsongmail.com>:

>
> Why would "dog" be the category?  To me, the
category (the container)
> is "animals" -- and "dog" and
"bird" are things, or instances of
> things which go into the category "animals".
>

While dog is an animal a collie is a dog.  While bird is an
animal a 
cardinal is a bird.

Earnie -- http://for-my-kids.com/
-- http://give-me-an-offer.
com/

Quoting Earl Miles <merlinlogrus.com>:

> Earnie Boyd wrote:
>> Quoting Chris Johnson <cxjohnsongmail.com>:
>>
>>>
>>> Why would "dog" be the category?  To
me, the category (the container)
>>> is "animals" -- and "dog"
and "bird" are things, or instances of
>>> things which go into the category
"animals".
>>>
>>
>> While dog is an animal a collie is a dog.  While
bird is an animal a 
>> cardinal is a bird.
>
> Lassie is the object which is tagged 'collie' and
through parenting 
> also  'dog' and 'animal'.
>

Yes.  Earl and I have just pointed out that the vocabulary
name itself 
is a parent term.  I think a table structure redesign is in
order but 
I'll discuss that in the appropriate group or issue.

Earnie -- http://for-my-kids.com/
-- http://give-me-an-offer.
com/