I've totally changed my mind on this.<br><br>I'm now fully in the Derek camp and support Taxonomy/Vocabulary/Term. I think the problem was in poor help texts. <br><br>Changing the administration page label to "categories" was a total bust. I think consistency is important. The issues that Derek raises about the URLs is very important.
<br><br>I think really good help texts with lots of fully fleshed out examples is the way to go. I'd be willing to help out with the writing.<br><br>Shai<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 11/14/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">
Derek Wright</b> <<a href="mailto:drupal@dwwright.net">drupal@dwwright.net</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
[Am I the only one who thinks it's worth forking this monster thread<br>into appropriately named subthreads to cover the various parallel<br>conversations going on?]<br><br>On Nov 14, 2007, at 10:09 AM, Larry Garfield wrote:
<br><br>> That's again coming back to a very blog-centric view of taxonomy.<br>> Half the things I use taxonomy module for are not really<br>> "categories". If you enable free tagging, you're then talking
<br>> about "tags", not really "categories". Category carries a lot of<br>> mental weight that is very limiting.<br><br>Right. -1 to renaming "term" to "category". -1 to renaming it to
<br>"tag", either, since that's just as limiting. I see nothing wrong<br>with "term" -- it's simple enough for everyone to grasp, generic<br>enough to be accurate for the various use cases, and is already
<br>burned into the consciousness of the existing Drupal community.<br>Plus, there are a boatload of URLs, RSS feeds, etc that contain<br>"term" in them -- changing it in the UI but not the URL or menu would<br>
be a huge step backwards, and there will be massive link rot to<br>contend with if we change the URLs.<br><br>On the other hand, even bigger -1 for renaming "vocabulary" to<br>"category", since in many cases, each term is a _category_ of the
<br>nodes that have it. Look at the project node vocabulary on d.o: each<br>term ("Images", "Mail", "Vies", etc) is a category of modules that<br>are related to that term. Calling this whole vocabulary a "category"
<br>is totally misleading and confusing -- it's a set of categories.<br><br>For a very non-"tag" and non-"category" usage of taxonomy, look at<br>the "Drupal core compatibility" term on release nodes on
d.o. "5.x"<br>vs. "6.x" is *sort* of like a category, but not really. It's really<br>part of the version string, it's a classification of releases based<br>on core compatibility. I can't really wrap my head around thinking
<br>of this as a "category", and it's certainly not just a "tag"...<br><br><br>Finally, I agree with the last few comments in this thread that the<br>biggest usability problem was the (IMHO foolish) decision to say
<br>"taxonomy is too scary, let's inconsistently refer to it as<br>'categories' in some places in the UI". That right there is the root<br>of most of our trouble. Renaming the menu item back to just
<br>"taxonomy" and removing places in the UI (other than help texts) that<br>use this ambiguous terminology would be a big win. I'd say "step<br>forward", but it'd be a correction to our current regression. ;)
<br><br>-Derek (dww)<br><br><br>p.s. If we end up renaming "taxonomy" to "classification", it *must*<br>be in D7, since it's totally evil to have the menu paths, UI<br>elements, module name, and function names all disagree. It'll be a
<br>huge task to port everything to hook_classification_*, and that<br>*needs* to be D7, not D6.<br><br></blockquote></div><br>