From: Ayelie ayelie.at.large@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Commons-l] HotCat JavaScript tool, V0.1
Hmm... adding this to this thread because it kind of fits in with the idea of HotCat.js.
What about the ability to mass-add images to a category? I'm thinking of cases where people have created a gallery with images but none are categorised; this happens a lot and it's a pain to open every image and edit to add the category. Something like Magnus's category move javascript, where you can select images in a category and move them to another, but activated for galleries.
No I totally disagree, if there are many images organized in a gallery then the gallery should already be linked to a category. I have been busy taking these duplicated images out of Categories and leaving them in the article galleries. It's would be the same as that User who created 1000's of species categories with all the photos duplicated in the category that were already in the individual galleries, Way too much duplication. Magnus and others have that great tool for showing galleries and categories on the screen and some photos are in up to 6 or 7 different categories and galleries, simplification is the best way. [[User:WayneRay]]
On 7/9/07, wayne cpa@sympatico.ca wrote:
From: Ayelie ayelie.at.large@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Commons-l] HotCat JavaScript tool, V0.1
Hmm... adding this to this thread because it kind of fits in with the
idea
of HotCat.js.
What about the ability to mass-add images to a category? I'm thinking of cases where people have created a gallery with images but none are categorised; this happens a lot and it's a pain to open every image and
edit
to add the category. Something like Magnus's category move javascript,
where
you can select images in a category and move them to another, but
activated
for galleries.
No I totally disagree, if there are many images organized in a gallery then the gallery should already be linked to a category. I have been busy taking these duplicated images out of Categories and leaving them in the article galleries. It's would be the same as that User who created 1000's of species categories with all the photos duplicated in the category that were already in the individual galleries, Way too much duplication. Magnus and others have that great tool for showing galleries and categories on the screen and some photos are in up to 6 or 7 different categories and galleries, simplification is the best way. [[User:WayneRay]]
Simplification is the best way, yes, but I think you're missing the point that categories and galleries are for separate things. Categories are for gathering all images on a subject, of a subject, or related to a subject together in one place. A gallery is for "showcasing", if you will, the best images on a subject. We don't need a gallery for a species of which we only have three images; that is what categories are for. When I look at an image of something and want to see others of the same type the first thing I do is scroll to the bottom to see what categories it's in; yes, the image might be in a gallery, but not everyone adds images to galleries because of the extra work and thus I will be missing many possible images if there is no category.
Images should be categorised as much as possible to facilitate finding images of a broader subject, and galleries should be utilised to bring together the best or most relevant images of a subject to make it easier to find them without browsing for ages. If an image is in a gallery that's great, but please don't remove it from the category. Anyone who looks just in the category will be missing the images located in the gallery.