- Avoid use of "Taxonomy" in the UI. The overall system, despite the module name, is "Categories."
-1 for this. It used to be called "Taxonomy", but was changed to "Categories" for some reason. Go back to calling it Taxonomy.
I completely agree with you, Richard.
<AOL>Me too</AOL>: use precisely one of these words throughout, and it looks like (for URL reasons) "taxonomy" is the harder one to get rid of. That at least removes the main *inherent* ambiguity in the system: the rest of the problems are IMHO caused by the loadedness of words in other contexts. Word back from a tame librarian: ) How about 'descriptor'? (It does presuppose that they're descriptive, ) though.) Then you can have 'collections' of descriptors. Inelegant ) and abstract, but that's the price of avoiding terms which are weighed ) down with existing connotations. ) ) Archivists talk about 'fonds' and 'sub-fonds', so I wouldn't ask them. Moral of the story: forget about librarians, unless you're after a book. Cheers, J-P -- J-P Stacey +44 (0)1608 811870 http://torchbox.com