4 ms·
Ah, interesting! I never used del.icio.us myself, but from what I understand, it's fairly similar to Instagram (for example) in how tags work, optimizing for ea
by caseyross 4y ago
Ah, interesting! I never used del.icio.us myself, but from what I understand, it's fairly similar to Instagram (for example) in how tags work, optimizing for ease of use rather than ease of finding specific content. In my opinion, this is almost certainly the right decision for any platform where "absurdly detailed search" is not job #1, and I'm pretty sure I would have argued the same way as you did.
That said, having seen some of the centralized, intricate tagging systems out there, that let you filter down from Earth to one specific ant in the blink of an eye, that's what I think of when I think of "tagging" that's really effective. YMMV, but I would argue that if you can't type in 10 different tags and get 1 result that's exactly what you're looking for, tags aren't really delivering on their promise.
- joshu 4y agono. tags were a separate field, and you were shown the tags you used as prominently as the things themselves. note that it was built as a memory aid so that you had a chance of finding something again later. your idea that it needs be exact, perfect, and precise or it won’t work is silly.
- caseyross 4y agoOk, after reading this and also your top-level comment, seems we're talking about the two different types of tagging ("personal curation" vs "collaborative") which you list in that comment. That makes more sense. Definitely agree that if you're mainly tagging for your future self, you can derive tons of value without constraints. Whereas if you have people tagging for others, that needs more support. Although, if you're so inclined, you could also view these as a continuum --- with "personal" tagging being the apex of centralized consensus, and having to increasingly labor for consensus with every added user in the system.