Robert Stojnic schrieb:
> Aryeh Gregor wrote:
>> Right. Supporting category intersection and search in category with
>> better UI (we already sort of support it if you know the right magic
>> terms) is what we should be aiming for here.
>>
>
> Last year, just around this time, we came to the exactly same
> conclusion. And similarly like then, there is no shortage of good
> opinions on how to do it, but people to actually do the programming.
>
> r.
Wikimedia Germany has contracted Neil Harris to work on implementing deep
category intersection. The goal is basically a rewrite of my sucky CatScan tool.
The result is hopefully fast & generic enough so it can be used as a service
that integrates with the current search infrastructure.
The project has started, there is funding and a project plan. I expect to see
usable results soon. In fact, I hope to present this at the developer meeting in
april (neil, contact me about attending) and discuss the integration into lucene
search.
I agree that full recursive flattening of the current category structure leads
to bad results some times (especially on the english wikipedia, commons is quite
bad too), a depth of 5 however is generally useful. One common use case is
intersecting a content category with a maintenance category, for organizing
editorial work in a wiki project. In that case, at least one category comes from
a template.
Atomic categorization aka tagging however also sucks: the tags are either too
generic (so it's hard to find stuff) or too specific (you never know what to
search for). tags implying/including other tags is very useful. which is exactly
what categories with deep intersection will provide.
-- daniel
