[development] Taxonomy labeling changes

Neil Drumm drumm at delocalizedham.com
Wed Nov 14 20:09:58 UTC 2007

On Nov 14, 2007 11:51 AM, Derek Wright <drupal at dwwright.net> wrote:
> On Nov 14, 2007, at 11:42 AM, Neil Drumm wrote:
> > Here is how to get this accomplished:
> >
> > 1. Design 2-3 new well-thought-out naming schemes.
> > 2. Test each, and our current system, with 5 users. Chose users with
> > various skill levels and various backgrounds in other software.
> > 3. Objectively see what is best instead of subjectively speculating.
> >
> > Let me know when you have a well-written usability report and I will
> > write the patches.
> While I appreciate your general approach, I'm forced to ask:
> Is this the methodology that was followed which got us to the
> existing mixup of confusing terminology and inconsistencies in the UI?

No. As far as I know, the current labeling scheme was designed by the
original developers and never really changed a whole lot, except
relabeling most uses of "taxonomy" to "categories."

> There's been an outpouring of support for the proposal to keep the
> existing terminology, but to use it consistently in the UI.  Why is
> there resistance to just fixing that in D6 while we still can,
> instead of further delaying it with other hoops to jump through?

Consistency is absolutely necessary under any labeling system. At this
point in Drupal 6's cycle, I would accept all consistency improvements
and reject sweeping labeling changes of any UI.

As I understand the current rules, they are:
- Use the same names in the UI as we do in the API, properly
capitalized and punctuated. That means Term, Tag, Vocabulary.
- Avoid use of "Taxonomy" in the UI. The overall system, despite the
module name, is "Categories."

The point is-- objective analysis is the best way to settle debates
with no clear answer.

Neil Drumm

More information about the development mailing list