content types. posts. post settings.
Can we have more synonyms, please? we are using the same word twice. this is not good. we MUST find a third! Or maybe we should just stick to one not to confuse the hell out of everyone? Regards NK
Can we have more synonyms, please? we are using the same word twice. this is not good. we MUST find a third!
content types != posts. Posts are unique instances of content types. We could name them "content" surely (and I'd support that - I never liked "posts"). -- Morbus Iff ( oh, i wish i was a hoggle ) Technical: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/779 Culture: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.gamegrene.com/ icq: 2927491 / aim: akaMorbus / yahoo: morbus_iff / jabber.org: morbus
Agreed, I think content is the most prevalent...something like content types, content, content settings. Is there a helper word for content (a.k.a. "posts") to help qualify the 2nd one as a list of the content on your site? Something like "List of content" or "Site content"? Rob Roy Barreca Founder and COO Electronic Insight Corporation http://www.electronicinsight.com rob@electronicinsight.com Morbus Iff wrote:
Can we have more synonyms, please? we are using the same word twice. this is not good. we MUST find a third!
content types != posts.
Posts are unique instances of content types. We could name them "content" surely (and I'd support that - I never liked "posts").
Op donderdag 9 november 2006 22:34, schreef Karoly Negyesi:
Can we have more synonyms, please? we are using the same word twice. this is not good. we MUST find a third!
Or maybe we should just stick to one not to confuse the hell out of everyone?
Articles? Oh, and while we are at it, please find a third name for taxonomy too! The terms 'Categories' and 'taxonomy' mixed up is not confusing enough yet. we must try to keep that learning curve steep. :) Bèr
Articles?
Uh no. A blog entry is not an article. A picture of my baby is not an article. A two line rant about semantics is not an article... ;) -- Morbus Iff ( i've got the creme filling ) Technical: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/779 Culture: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.gamegrene.com/ icq: 2927491 / aim: akaMorbus / yahoo: morbus_iff / jabber.org: morbus
I would currently consider any use of the words node, taxonomy, and term in UI text to be bugs. These are post/content, categories, and category. On post vs content (article is too specific and wrong, that would be a content type), lets look at the full list: post types or content types posts or content post settings or content settings search posts or search content create post or create content The big picture is that we need a style guide for UI text. Something to explain what words we use and what they mean for UI design and implementation. We have these rules now, but no one has written them down. -- Neil Drumm http://delocalizedham.com/
Without any doubt "content"! On 11/10/06, Neil Drumm <drumm@delocalizedham.com> wrote:
I would currently consider any use of the words node, taxonomy, and term in UI text to be bugs. These are post/content, categories, and category.
On post vs content (article is too specific and wrong, that would be a content type), lets look at the full list:
post types or content types posts or content post settings or content settings search posts or search content create post or create content
The big picture is that we need a style guide for UI text. Something to explain what words we use and what they mean for UI design and implementation. We have these rules now, but no one has written them down.
-- Neil Drumm http://delocalizedham.com/
Much talk, but with results (surprise!) a) Drumm treats this is a bug b) content is preferred. So: http://drupal.org/node/94019 let's continue there.
Hi, I'm new to Drupal and to this mailinglist. I'm impressed by the strength of the community and the system itself, and I look forward to learning Drupal and eventually contribute with some modules. As as a newbie with a fresh look on Drupal, I thought I could start off by sharing my opinions on this issue.. I agree with Drumm's suggestions, but taxonomy is different from controlled vocabularies and should maybe be called hierarchical categories (in the help text and descriptions)? post -> content node -> content term -> category taxonomy -> hierarchical categories Consistency is important, especially for end users with no knowledge of the system. Use of easy to understand concepts and words won't confuse non-technical end users. I see some great improvements in useability from 4.7 to 5.0, but there is still a lot of inconsistency in the UI text and documentation. Regardless of some useability issues, I think I'm in love. Coming from WordPress, Drupal looks (and feels) rock solid! Joakim
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Joakim Stai wrote:
I agree with Drumm's suggestions, but taxonomy is different from controlled vocabularies and should maybe be called hierarchical categories (in the help text and descriptions)?
post -> content node -> content term -> category taxonomy -> hierarchical categories
Taxonomy is not necceserily hierarchical, it can be flat (eg for tagging). Gabor
On 10/11/06, Neil Drumm <drumm@delocalizedham.com> wrote:
I would currently consider any use of the words node, taxonomy, and term in UI text to be bugs. These are post/content, categories, and category.
and in URLs? node/123.. admin/taxonomy.. They are (an integral) part of the UI too. -K
Karthik wrote:
On 10/11/06, Neil Drumm <drumm@delocalizedham.com> wrote:
I would currently consider any use of the words node, taxonomy, and term in UI text to be bugs. These are post/content, categories, and category.
and in URLs? node/123.. admin/taxonomy..
They are (an integral) part of the UI too.
One thing at a time. And lets not break all those while in beta mode. -- Neil Drumm http://delocalizedham.com/
At 1:15 AM -0800 11/10/06, Neil Drumm wrote:
I would currently consider any use of the words node, taxonomy, and term in UI text to be bugs. These are post/content, categories, and category.
I feel that is not true. Category is but one expression of taxonomy. Taxonomy is far more complex and powerful than a simple category/tagging system and calling it such is good. Talk to any information professional, such as librarians, and they will tell you that taxonomy is an important term/concept and drupal gets much credit for using that term instead of dumbing it down as "categories" I've had more than one opportunity to develop on drupal because the system is called "taxonomy" and therefor implies much more complex possibilities than if it was called tags or categories. --Eric -- ------------------------------------------- Openflows Community Technology Lab, Inc. New York | Toronto | Montreal | Vienna http://openflows.com People are intelligent. Machines are tools.
At 1:15 AM -0800 11/10/06, Neil Drumm wrote:
I would currently consider any use of the words node, taxonomy, and term in UI text to be bugs. These are post/content, categories, and category.
I feel that is not true. Category is but one expression of taxonomy. Taxonomy is far more complex and powerful than a simple category/tagging system and calling it such is good. Talk to any information professional, such as librarians, and they will tell you that taxonomy is an important term/concept and drupal gets much credit for using that term instead of dumbing it down as "categories"
I've had more than one opportunity to develop on drupal because the system is called "taxonomy" and therefor implies much more complex possibilities than if it was called tags or categories.
I've been looking at ontologies recently and think that taxonomy isnt representative enough! taxonomies are classes of things. I recommend that anyone considering this looks at Wikipedia's page on ontologies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology_%28computer_science%29 * Individuals: the basic or "ground level" objects * Classes: sets, collections, or types of objects[1] * Attributes: properties, features, characteristics, or parameters that objects can have and share * Relations: ways that objects can be related to one another Now basically we have Individuals which are Drupal Nodes. Classes are Drupal Taxonomy terms Attributes are Flexinode fields, or metadata like "author" or CCK fields, and Relations is the one thing which is missing! If anyone (in the UK) is interested in implementing relations I'd consider paying for it :-) Alex
Eric Goldhagen wrote:
At 1:15 AM -0800 11/10/06, Neil Drumm wrote:
I would currently consider any use of the words node, taxonomy, and term in UI text to be bugs. These are post/content, categories, and category.
I feel that is not true. Category is but one expression of taxonomy. Taxonomy is far more complex and powerful than a simple category/tagging system and calling it such is good. Talk to any information professional, such as librarians, and they will tell you that taxonomy is an important term/concept and drupal gets much credit for using that term instead of dumbing it down as "categories"
I've had more than one opportunity to develop on drupal because the system is called "taxonomy" and therefor implies much more complex possibilities than if it was called tags or categories.
Before we decide how we make these language choices we really have to figure out who is/are Drupal's audiences. The complete and answer to that is: we are a bunch of contributors with individual goals, and are collectively writing for the sum of our individual audiences. Unfortunately, that definition doesn't get us very far. We do have some useful data for the recent administrator's survey, which Kieran, myself, and others are working on writing up in the most useful and presentable way. This will tell us how Drupal administrators self-identify. For the problem at hand, convention and existing implementation tell us that category is the preferred word at the moment, so we should use it. -- Neil Drumm http://delocalizedham.com/
At 10:23 AM -0800 11/10/06, Neil Drumm wrote:
Eric Goldhagen wrote:
At 1:15 AM -0800 11/10/06, Neil Drumm wrote:
I would currently consider any use of the words node, taxonomy, and term in UI text to be bugs. These are post/content, categories, and category.
I feel that is not true. Category is but one expression of taxonomy. Taxonomy is far more complex and powerful than a simple category/tagging system and calling it such is good. Talk to any information professional, such as librarians, and they will tell you that taxonomy is an important term/concept and drupal gets much credit for using that term instead of dumbing it down as "categories"
I've had more than one opportunity to develop on drupal because the system is called "taxonomy" and therefor implies much more complex possibilities than if it was called tags or categories.
Before we decide how we make these language choices we really have to figure out who is/are Drupal's audiences.
The complete and answer to that is: we are a bunch of contributors with individual goals, and are collectively writing for the sum of our individual audiences. Unfortunately, that definition doesn't get us very far.
We do have some useful data for the recent administrator's survey, which Kieran, myself, and others are working on writing up in the most useful and presentable way. This will tell us how Drupal administrators self-identify.
For the problem at hand, convention and existing implementation tell us that category is the preferred word at the moment, so we should use it.
I agree totally that changes to language need to be done only after careful deliberation and discussion. Discussion on who the audience is we are all building for would be an interesting place to start. But, as to your last point that convention and existing implementation tell us that category is the term to use, I'd counter that with the same argument. Existing implementation and convention is for the link to taxonomy administration to be called Category (to clear up confusion for new users), but that the module and system are referred to by Taxonomy to fully and accurately define what it does and what is possible. I think this is not a bad inconsistency, but valid to bring new users along a learning curve. --Eric -- ------------------------------------------- Openflows Community Technology Lab, Inc. New York | Toronto | Montreal | Vienna http://openflows.com People are intelligent. Machines are tools.
participants (11)
-
alex＠owal.co.uk -
Bèr Kessels -
Eric Goldhagen -
Fernando Silva -
Gabor Hojtsy -
Joakim Stai -
Karoly Negyesi -
Karthik -
Morbus Iff -
Neil Drumm -
Rob Barreca