4 ms·
Your comment could not be more irrelevant. OP said "websites were organized according to a hierarchy" - a hierarchy, not THE hierarchy.
by mdoms 5y ago
Your comment could not be more irrelevant. OP said "websites were organized according to a hierarchy" - a hierarchy, not THE hierarchy.
- dredmorbius 5y agoTry it sometime. You'll find that: 1. It's harder than it looks. 1. The hierarchy is stubbornly inconsistent. Take the example of MP3s, or more generally, audio files vs. text vs. images vs. multimedia. Do you classify all audio indepednetly of any text, regardless of whether it's, say, a history of WWII in the Czechoslovakia? Is a historical study of military technology used in Czechoslovaki during WWII filed under history (WWII), geography (Czechoslovakia), technology (military), or military science (technology)? What happens when countries change or borders shift (Holy Roman Empire -> Austria-Hungary -> Czechoslovakia -> Czechia)? Or when a region is disputed (West Bank, Taiwan, Kashmir, Oregon Teritory, Malvinas, ...)? Is Ireland part of the British Isles? Is it "mythology", "fiction", "religion", "theology", "philosophy", "cult", or "mass delusion"? Even if it's a single person's classification, conflicts rapidly emerge. Increase the number of catologers, or add multiple readers/users, and you'll start getting complaints and exceptionally strong disagreements. I'm not opposed to the practice. I've attempted it myself numerous times. I'm working on several approaches presently.