The category system on this site has always been rather ignored. I don’t think I’ve added or altered a category in 6 months. Many categories have only a few posts, and a few categories have the bulk of posts.
I think this site is much better suited to the concept of tags. Tags are like categories, but without a rigid hierarchy. They can be added on the fly, and used for global relationships between blog posts (using cool tools like Technorati).
The plugin I’ve settled on to handle this tag goodness is Ultimate Tag Warrior, an extremely well-written plugin that is worlds above any of the other ones out there. There are still some things I’d like it to do (paging of tag pages, for one), and I’ll likely be hacking these things in and submitting the modifications back to the plugin’s creator so that all may enjoy. Isn’t open source software fun?
Anyway, you can view tag results by going to: http://txfx.net/tag/tag-name. You can find the intersection of two tags by going to http://txfx.net/tag/tag-name+other-tag-name.
You’ve said what I’ve been thinking for a while now. My problem has been two parts.
One, WordPress seems really insistent about using categories. (Hopefully the plugin you mentioned will change that.)
The other problem is that I don’t like to post using the web interface. I like using clients like MarsEdit and w.bloggar, but they don’t seem to have a good way to enter tags. The keywords field would be a great way to enter them, but there doesn’t seem to be a way for plugins to tap into that data.
Dropped by to invite you to a Carnival
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/365
Derik, (on the off-chance you see this..)
Right now, you can get Ultimate Tag Warrior to automagically turn categories into tags; so if you’re okay with having an broad category tree, you can do the tagging thing that way.
Real soon, I’m going to build the magic needing for keeping a set of tags in parallel in a meta-data field. I’m not sure if having an “automagically turn a meta-data field into tags” thing would work in your situation – I know little to nothing about the clients you mention (:
– Christine
Christine,
I think he’s referring to the “keywords” field that is used by XMLRPC clients for remote posting. This is different from a WordPress metadata field. WordPress does not use the keywords field, AFAIK. We’ll need a hook allowing us to handle this field in order to support tagging for XMLRPC client users.
Gah!
Ah well.
Something a little further down the line is a thing for parsing content looking for things wrapped in <tag> html fake-tags.
(I will find a way to solve all problems.. Oh yes, I will!)
(eventually.)
Heres the deal.
Categories and tags are really the same thing, right ? Actually, categories do have one extra “feature”, a way to organize hierarchically.
The difference is HOW you use them, and the WAY they are used.
For categories, you have to go in and manually set them up before you can use them … they are like “serious” tags, tags you have given some thought to. They are heavy and ponderous, not easily changed. But for this reason they are suitable for listing in a sidebar.
Tags are social-butterflies, they are whimsical, light, carefree. Tags are left-brained. If you don’t like agonizing over categories, maybe tags are for you.
I have tags like “blog”, “blogging”, “blogs”. Hey, that’s 3 tags that are all the same thing ! That just hilights how whimsical in nature tags are.
—
Ah ha, heres the thing …. You COULD use tags like categories if you wanted … and you could use categories like tags !
I’ve seen plenty of blogs with just a million categories … no hierarchy at all. (Sounds like tags, ehh ?).
—
I think it’s all a personality thing to a certain degree.
Sometimes rigid/analytical/ponderous thinking is appropriate (think categories, the senate, religon …) … other times carefree/whimsical thinking is best (think tags, music, the arts …).
addendum …
this entry has sparked a mini “category” crisis for me, hee hee …
Wow … here’s one last thought … (I swear).
I wonder if the rigid/ponderous/heavy/unyielding category tree in fact has some insidious and subtle effect on WHAT we actually blog ?
Ever thought of that ?
I mean … I wonder if subconsciously, after setting up the category tree, if we are thinking “where will this entry” go when we sit down to write an entry … and hence the category tree is restricting our creativity in some ways ?
Categories are like laws or rules, the Sunday morning sermon, the police man making sure you don’t break the speed limit … geez.
Tags are like sex, anarchy ! Chaos !
Categories are like putting your seat belt on.
Tags are like having 3 cocktails at the bar and going dancing !
o.k., enough …
I wonder if tags and categories can co-exist ? Like the political left and the political right (which they sort of resemble if you think about it). Actually, tags would have to be Libertarians. Categories are conservative Republicans: “Here’s my category tree … don’t go shaking it up, now !” … “My tree is the only tree …”.
Taggers are “relativists” … blog, blogging, blogs, who cares !
Taggers are agnostics. Categorizers are believers.
I bet taggers have better sex too, hee hee.
I’ll be damned, I think it’s time I became a tagger.
E-head,
Heh… I think you’re on to something. Yeah, categories and tags are basically the same thing, except for that categories are a rigid hierarchial structure. It’s a pecking order. Tags are a free for all of thoughts and ideas. The other thing that separates them is that most tagging systems allow you to create new tags dynamically as you write the enty… whereas creating a category is a big deal. When you have categories, you have to think “hm, does this go in A, or B?” With tags, you say “screw it, this is C!”
Of course, if you get too whimsical, it can lead to tag pollution. Blogs, blogging, blog, etc. If you get too specific with your tags, they are meaningless because the relationships between entries are fragmented. Still, you’ll be more specific than you are with categories.
Ha! Tags are very libertarian. Maybe that’s why I like them so much! Of course, I’m also a believer, although an agnostic one. Agnostic and beliver can both coincide. There’s theism/atheism, and agnostic/gnostic flavors of both. I’m an agnostic theist because I believe that God exists, but to not presume to know it or be able to prove it through reason.
Sorry for the delayed response. Mark knows exactly what I’m talking about. If you can figure out a way to put a hook in for the keywords field, I’ll be the first to download.