Live data from Hacker News

Designing better file organization around tags, not hierarchies (2017)

nayuki.io

141–150 of 169 posts

Re: Designing better file organization around tags, not hierarchies (2017)

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why one couldn't have a tag system whose scope is defined by its location in a hierarchical structure.

apparently someone thought that the notion of a tag system with a semantic scope bound to a file tree hierarchy is such a ridiculous--nay, offensive!--idea that they had to downvote me for it, but couldn't bother to address it on the merits. The problem I see with tag based structures is that tags are global in scope, and so, tags have to mean one thing and one thing only; on the other hand, having one set of tags fo…

I agree, though I think this kind of hierarchy should be shallow and high level, representing only typical search scope boundaries.

Re: Designing better file organization around tags, not hierarchies (2017)

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for i in *.jpg; do date=$(exif $i --machine-readable --tag=0x9003 | cut -d ' ' -f 1 | tr : -) mkdir -p $date mv $i $date done But don't many photo-browsing programs allow browsing by date, or even GPS-tagged location? e.g. on KDE's DigiKam I choose "timeline" view (or map view).

Oh, damn. The formatting was lost, I had line breaks in there!

Indent with 2 spaces to format code: https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc

Re: Designing better file organization around tags, not hierarchies (2017)

#144
My pet peeve with tagging systems in general, but especially community-based tagging is false negatives. If I search using a tag, there's no guarantee at all that it will display ALL the items that qualify for it.

I'll use my favorite porn site as an example, without going into any specifics and especially linking. I just skimmed the HN Guidelines and I don't think I'm breaking any.

Suppose I try the tag #bigtits. It is highly unlikely that I will get all the pictures with women who have especially large breasts. It's because no one will review all the images and verify if the tag #bigtits applies to them. That would be very time-consuming even for the most motivated individual who uses both hands for typing. So if I were into that particular fetish, I would need to try #bigtits, then #busty, then #nicerack, #slimandbusty, #ygwbt... because each tag has its proponents, and there's definitely overlap between them. You could - and I've seen non-porn sites doing that - use a program for automatic tagging, but then in my opinion you are defeating the purpose of tagging, which is grouping things by interesting categories. Machine-generated tags tend to be lifeless.

As I've said it is a pet peeve of mine, and I will likely start a project or two to implement my fixes for a web framework or a static blog generator. I mean that I should have confidence that a tag has been considered for all content in the collection. Program-assisted tags can help, such as keeping track of what tags existed at the point when a picture was added.

Then there are almost identical tags. #cat vs #cats, #tortoise vs #turtle, #color vs #colour.

Overall, in practice, I think tagging, as usually implemented, is the most overrated feature of the Web 2.0 era.

Re: Designing better file organization around tags, not hierarchies (2017)

#145
post #11
post #6

Tagging is the first step, but how do you know if you don't have overlapping or duplicate tags, say country and folk music? If you need something that fits both categories, you eventually start designing taxonomies and eventually ontologies, there's just no end to it. I think tagging is a sensible, lightweight approach, but it has limitations...

> country and folk music Folk music has nothing to do with country. Country was invented in the 1800s by a businessman who aimed it at primarily white Americans. Folk music has a rich history dating before the 1200s and before much of written language. Many songs of Irish and Welsh descent date before record, still being played today. Nevertheless, to answer your question: 1) metatags, parent tags, and the like provi…

> > country and folk music

> Folk music has nothing to do with country.

I think the point was that they're both "music"; congrats, now you have a hierarchy again!

Re: Designing better file organization around tags, not hierarchies (2017)

#146
post #11
post #6

Tagging is the first step, but how do you know if you don't have overlapping or duplicate tags, say country and folk music? If you need something that fits both categories, you eventually start designing taxonomies and eventually ontologies, there's just no end to it. I think tagging is a sensible, lightweight approach, but it has limitations...

> country and folk music Folk music has nothing to do with country. Country was invented in the 1800s by a businessman who aimed it at primarily white Americans. Folk music has a rich history dating before the 1200s and before much of written language. Many songs of Irish and Welsh descent date before record, still being played today. Nevertheless, to answer your question: 1) metatags, parent tags, and the like provi…

"Folk music" possibly rides on the definition of "folk", which brings in a lot of diversity if interpreted broadly.

The word "folk" also denotes recognizeable format in the context of commercial broadcasting and streaming of canned music. It basically refers to a locus roughly centered around someone crooning while strumming chords on an acoustic guitar.

Re: Designing better file organization around tags, not hierarchies (2017)

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a big problem with metadata-aware “file systems” is that the metadata is lost once the file is exported out of the system. This is a problem with ID3 tags for instance. Another problem is where you make the compromise in the no-mans land between fully fledged data structure and file system. As soon as you start adding meaningful metadata to the file system, it quickly becomes apparent that you want the files…

> the metadata is lost once the file is exported out of the system. This is a problem with ID3 tags for instance. Are you sure? ID3 tags are embedded in the file itself, and therefore remains in the file no matter what medium you store it on.

That’s my point.

Re: Designing better file organization around tags, not hierarchies (2017)

#148
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few things I can see off the top of my head that would need to be solved for tag filesystems to be able to take off: 1. Inertia. Most software assumes hierarchical filesystems, and assumes it can control some portion of that hierarchy. This includes things ranging from search paths for various things ($PATH for binaries, library paths, etc), temporary files, preferences files for applications, assumptions made abou…

I think many of these issues can be addressed with mechanisms proposed by the author. Mainly, the more complex tags which can themselves refer to other tags. 1. This is probably the trickiest one. You may be able to do some sort of translation between a hierarchical system and the tag system using tags themselves. You could have a series of tags that refer to each other, such that the hierarchical location is essenti…

I think you're missing some of the subtleties of solving these problems using "just more tags."

In a hierarchical system, a lot of these organizational issues are local. If I have one directory that consists of a project organized one way, and another directory that consists of a different project organized a different way, those different organizations don't really interact with each other in any way.

If you are using tags for everything, in order to avoid weird mishmashes of different ways of using tags, you would need to either have a completely standardized tagging system that everything used consistently, or you'd have to always include various contextual information in your queries or in your browsing in order for the queries to make sense. For instance: [mount: my-hd][project: my-project][type: jpeg]

I think you overstate the problem with different applications as well. For a large amount of the metadata that is relevant for these applications, there is a standard tagging system. ID3 for music, EXIF for images, XMP for various image and video formats. It's true that there is some metadata that these applications store in proprietary databases, but that's mostly an issue of it being difficult to come to a consensus on standards that meet everyone's needs, and it's easier to just write some proprietary metadata somewhere. With tagging systems, if there wasn't agreement on the schema of tags, you'd still have the same issue.

I don't think it's a bad idea to consider alternatives that are more general and more flexible than what we're doing now, but I do think that it's pretty easy to handwave about how nice a tag based system would be, but a lot harder to solve all of the little problems that are going to come up and turn it into a real, coherent, working whole, and then getting enough critical mass so that it is used outside of a small niche with a handful of applications.

Re: Designing better file organization around tags, not hierarchies (2017)

#149

I wrote a paper about the same topic while in Uni about 15 years ago, and also developed a proof of concept 'filesystem' with an file explorer that uses tags. Too bad it isn't the standard in any OS yet.

Would you care to share the name or a link to your paper?

Re: Designing better file organization around tags, not hierarchies (2017)

#150
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Desktop was indeed a great solution partially solving the tag problem in Windows. A good tagging system trumps search as you can make the results much better determinate. The ability to create your own namespace and then organize every file into that namespace ensures encapsulation. In a search result, you almost always have to filter out irrelevant items. Good working search solves the problem pragmatically t…

I am far too lazy to tag every file and I would despise such a system if forced into it. Some files I want to keep realizing I may never need them again. Tagging is a time waste. It's also difficult to anticipate future use and what tags are helpful. Now a tagging system that could be built over time from search results could be very useful. Apply tags as you go in batches in other words to aid future searches. If I…

You assume that you need to tag manually. You assume that you are forced to do so. Currently, it's perfectly possible to put all files in a single folder. Your OS will be happy about that (except maybe some technical limitation of max filecount of a folder).
Post reply on HN