Perhaps I am misunderstanding what can and cannot be represented, but the DAG matters a lot to some of us. Consider:
Cellular organisms Archaea Bacteria Eukaryotes Animals Vertebrates Invertebrates Plants Fungi etc. These are not correct taxonomy terms, but just for example. How would these be represented? With categories, it's straightforward. I don't see how a flat tag intersection does this.
Replacing categories seems like a strange thing to do, since one of the common requests I've seen in the past was to implement the ability to create multiple category systems for different namespaces.
Jim On Mar 2, 2008, at 1:26 PM, David Gerard wrote:
On 02/03/2008, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote:
Just for clarification, are we still talking category intersections? Or would a separate tagging system, in parallel to categories, be a better way?
- No messing with the existing category system
- Tagging/untagging without editing (?)
- No need to alter categories (tree) to fit new tagging scheme
(flat), preserving categories and not cluttering tagging with "category leftovers"
- Selective seeding of tags with categories
- Make (technically) sure tags are always "defined", so multiple
equivalent tags, can use integer IDs internally, etc.
Hopefully something that can replace the category system once the bugs are shaken out, such that the present microscopically small sub-sub-sub-sub-categories can be replaced with an intersection of tags.
That is: the main difference being in the back-end implementation, because we can't just run frequent queries on the intersection of ten categories without crippling the database server.
- d.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
===================================== Jim Hu Associate Professor Dept. of Biochemistry and Biophysics 2128 TAMU Texas A&M Univ. College Station, TX 77843-2128 979-862-4054