[WikiEN-l] Types of categories

[Steve Bennett]

On 6/6/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> > > Heh :) Input welcome! I think the distinction between "taxonomy" and
> > > "attribute" is probably a sliding scale. It comes down to what is
> > > natural. Do we really think in terms of "nobel laureates"? I doubt it
> >
> > Combining rigid rules with common sense is hard. I am tempted to quote your
> > line about inevitable disaster.
> >
> Personally I don't see the difference between taxonomies and
> attributes, as described.  But I suppose one (taxonomies?) could be
> described as partitioning (an article can only be in one taxonomy
> category) whereas attributes can be mixed.  Under that definition
> though, all taxonomies are attributes (but not vice-versa).  I'm not
> sure how close that definition is to reality though.

I'm inclined to think that in practice they pretty much work the same
way. However, semantically, I would really like to distinguish
concrete, significant, basic categories like "Ships" from much less
salient, significant facts like "Born in 1793" or "Winners of Golden
Raspberries". However, I suspect that even the most basic taxonomies
will have bastard children with two parents: Something could be both a
sport and a television show. Someone could be both a musician and a
scientist. But maybe the "one taxonomy per article except in strange
cases" goal is reasonable?

Steve