A question about tags

[bluefall.insanejournal.com]

In re: tagging our posts - due to the length of character names, if we're doing this whole identities thing, should we be using something like "char: cape name/civilian name" instead? (For example, instead of "character: silver swan ii/nessie kapatel" we could get "char: silver swan ii/nessie kapatelis," just to pick a completely random, have-no-idea-why-that-might-have-occurred-to-me example >.>). If so, that's probably something we should hash out early while it's still not too much of a headache to change.

For relevant legality,

Comments

[foxhack.insanejournal.com]

We already have a problem as it is. Check out Batgirl I and Robin I's name tags. B. Gordon and D. Grayson. And I had problems with character: Spoiler/Robin IV/Stephanie Brown. :(

Grrrrrrrrrrrrr stupid tag limits.

[kamino_neko.insanejournal.com]

Personally, I think ditching the cape names would be the best, unless they don't have a known civilian name.

Legacies and changing identities make the whole cape name/civilian name set up rather overly complex.

[bluefall.insanejournal.com]

I thought the old system of separate tags for each worked pretty well, TBH - sometimes you want to find a recent Wally post, sometimes you just want to read some Flash stories. Being able to search either for Babs posts in general or only for Oracle stories gave an extra layer of precision to things. And if we'd actually been disciplined about it, it would have been cool to be able to look for stories about Bruce Wayne, as opposed to stories about Batman (since a tale where he never suits up has a very different feel than one where he's out rooftopping).

[kamino_neko.insanejournal.com]

I'd be a little worried about tags hitting the limit in that case - which is why I suggested the 'civilian only' - but, ideally, that would be the most workable system, I agree.

[bluefall.insanejournal.com]

IJ may not have a limit. The 1000 tags limit was imposed artificially on LJ in response to, as I understand it, server load - there's nothing inherent in the code that requires it, as demonstrated by the fact that we used to have so very, very many more than 1000. IJ has a fraction of the load of LJ and may not have ever implemented a limiting feature. There's nothing I can find in their documentation or FAQ that indicates if they do one way or the other - probably that's the question to get answered first before we try to hash out any kind of system.

That said, one thing easy enough to deal with now: I feel like the "in-joke: " lead on the in-jokes kind of... kills the joke. Odd to say, but we could actually learn from F_W in this (their fandom tags are all "fandom: twilight" or whatever, but more freewheeling things like "think of the children" just... are).

[kamino_neko.insanejournal.com]

There's nothing I can find in their documentation or FAQ that indicates if they do one way or the other - probably that's the question to get answered first before we try to hash out any kind of system.

I asked about this way back in one of the mod posts, and at the time, Rabican didn't know if there was a limit, and certainly not what it is, if it exists. Obviously I agree with you on that point - maybe this thread'll bring the mods out on if there's an answer. >_>

That said, one thing easy enough to deal with now: I feel like the "in-joke: " lead on the in-jokes kind of... kills the joke.

Personally, I don't mind the local terminology being labelled as such, but I don't like the 'in-joke' label - it feels kind of like trying to lock out newbies - or at least make them feel like they're locked out. I don't know what would be better, and as I don't really think they NEED lumping, so...

[rabican.insanejournal.com]

That's actually a good point, hmmm. Well, after yet another futile FAQ search, I've submitted a support request, so we'll find out.

[unknownscribler.insanejournal.com]

I dislike the current tag system -- far too complicated and unintuitive.

[chipsnopotatoes.insanejournal.com]

why not use the same tags as scans daily 1.0? i.e. cape name and identity as two separate tags.

example: batman, bruce wayne

but pls let's keep it standardized so that we can search for posts easily.

thanks

[filbypott.insanejournal.com]

Agreed.

[saturn_girl9.insanejournal.com]

I agree. And if there are dozens of variations on "character: robin/nightwing" or "character: nightwing/robin" as well as shortened versions "char: robin" and "char. nightwing" or "char: dick grayson" none of us will really be able to obtain complete search results.

[kamino_neko.insanejournal.com]

The whole point of having a system is to NOT have 'dozens of variants', because there is a system that people are expected to stick to.

The problem is, the mods haven't actually clarified what the system is, so people keep making dozens of variants.

The current format of the character tags is not good for reasons mentioned above, but it's completely straightforward - character: ///. The categorized format, if used by people, also cuts down on the creation of variants by making it a LOT easier to check if there's already a tag. Having separate Character and Creator also makes it possible to keep use of creators as characters (especially when done by different creators) from their work as creators.

[kamino_neko.insanejournal.com]

but it's completely straightforward - character: ///.

*sigh* stupid angle-brackets.

That is to say character: [first cape name]/[second cape name]/[etc]/[civilian name]

[rabican.insanejournal.com]

Sorry, we've been worn a little thin - we've set the system and got tag volunteers to keep the tags consistent but we haven't actually announced anything. I'll try and get to that in the next day or two.

[ratmel.insanejournal.com]

I'm not convinced by the compound tags. I think it's including data that the medium is not suited for and doesn't really make it any easier to locate individual tags in the list. The fact that Dick Grayson is a character, is Robin I and is also Nightwing III (iirc :/) is information for a wiki. In a tag list it's just superfluous - Robin I will always be Dick Grayson who will always be a character. The tags should be an index not an appendix.

The compound tags do have their uses, for instance we may want 'title: robin' when we need the book rather than the cape, but these should be the exception rather than the rule.

Simple is best. The less complicated the tags are the fewer mistakes are going to be made. After all what are the chances of accidentally creating a new tag by misspelling 'jason todd' compared to 'character: robin ii/red hood/jason todd'?

I think what we really need are obvious tags like 'robin', 'nightwing', 'dick grayson', 'tim drake', and an external system that monitors our tagging and gives us a way to cross-reference them. That way we could look up 'tim drake' + 'dick grayson' when we need the brotherly lovin'! ^_^

[kamino_neko.insanejournal.com]

The compound tags do have their uses, for instance we may want 'title: robin' when we need the book rather than the cape, but these should be the exception rather than the rule.

Quite the contrary - making it the exception pretty much guarantees it will never be used, or it will be used incorrectly.

Consistency is more important than the negligible simplification from losing the classifications.

Not to mention when creators, characters, publishers, titles, jokes, media, and admin stuff are all in one big list, the chances of the tags getting lost in the shuffle goes up. Want to look to see if there's a tag for Alan Moore (there isn't, ATM, by the way)? In this list, you scroll down to the Creator section, then look through the As, and if he's there, he's among a handful.

Combine them all together, you have him thrown in among all the As, you've more than tripled the number of similar looking tags you've put him among.

This significantly increases the chances of not seeing the tag, and therefor a) removing the tag's utility in finding the material, because if you can't find the tag, you can't look at it, b) increasing the chances of creating the tag by mistyping it, because you think you need to add it, rather than just clicking on the list, c) not bothering to add it to a post.

Which, of course, brings us back to:

After all what are the chances of accidentally creating a new tag by misspelling 'jason todd' compared to 'character: robin ii/red hood/jason todd'?

If you actually know the tag exists, and are using the system sensibly, identical - that is to say, non-existent.

Much higher if you don't know the tag already exists, and are using the system sensibly, because 'jason todd' is a lot more likely to be missed than 'character: jason todd'. We've already got over a hundred tags, not including currently existing dupes, when we're up to multiple thousands again, having them properly organized will be vital.

If you're not using it sensibly, and typing in every tag every time, then, yeah, there are more opportunities to mistype when you have three words rather than two, or two rather than one, but if you're doing that, you're introducing an opportunity for error that needn't exist ANYWAY.

[bluefall.insanejournal.com]

You make sensible points, but there's still problems with the system simply because of identity load and identity shift. char: robin i/nightwing/d. gordon? Or char: robin i/nightwing/batman/d. gordon? What about JP Valley? Is he Batman or not? That's an incredibly important part of his character, but you're never going to think of him when you think "who is Batman." Both tags will be used. And what happens when a second Azrael pops up? We have a tag that says "char: azrael/batman/JP Valley" and a tag that says "char: azrael ii/whatsisface," and then someone makes a tag that says "char: azrael i/batman/JP Valley," because that's what the system calls for, right?

[kamino_neko.insanejournal.com]

I'm not defending the current format of the character tags - as I said above, I'm in agreement that separating the cape and civilian names is the ideal version - just the existence of the Character, Creator, Title, etc classifications.

[bluefall.insanejournal.com]

Ah, yes. Well I'm with you there, right up until the "etc." As I said above, "in-joke: " just... ow. And how do you classify a tag like "solicitations" or "webcomic"?

(Still, while the simplicity of char:, creator: and title: appeals greatly to my inner Lawful tendencies, even without the categories for anything, it's not that big a deal. Ctrl+F works just fine on the tag page. >.>)

[kamino_neko.insanejournal.com]

Webcomic fits perfectly well in 'medium'. Solicits, on the other hand, you're right - like most everything under the 'in-joke' group, I can't come up with a good class for it.

IMO, the most useful tag classes are char, creator, title, publisher, genre, and admin, and medium is defensible under the 'consistency' doctrine - although, could perhaps be renamed - technically speaking manga is the same medium as western comics, for instance - perhaps 'format' (possible tags within that class: webcomic, manga, manhua, Euro, American).

Improvements, to my mind: In-joke should be lost, or replaced with a less problematic class, and the 'char' class needs to have the tag format revised.

[rabican.insanejournal.com]

Okay, you guys are right on "in-joke," but when I was thinking over the "medium" tag the only alternative I could think of was "genre," which manga obviously is not. I was thinking TV and movies are both on film but are considered different media, so it should be for American comics and manga... but, I don't know, all the definitions are blurry at that level. And format sounds so sterile - it could as easily be paper size or whatever.

I'm still waiting to hear from Support on the tag limits issue, so we'll revisit "char" and make a proper tag discussion post then.

[kamino_neko.insanejournal.com]

Oh, and, yeah, you're right, the problem with getting lost in the jumble isn't insurmountable, so the classing isn't absolutely indispensable, but it simplifies things significantly. (Which appeals to me as a Chaotic...the less work I have to do to get something done, the more likely I am to follow through. >_>)

Were it up to me, I'd say go in and overhaul the tag system completely, but I'm in charge of neither LJ nor IJ, so...