[Tagging] football or soccer ?
simone.saviolo at gmail.com
Wed Jun 30 16:53:14 BST 2010
2010/6/30 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
> 2010/6/30 Zeke Farwell <ezekielf at gmail.com>:
>> Wow…. after following the back and forth on this thread I'm really starting
>> to understand the argument for numeric tagging schemes
>> sport=305 (american football)
>> sport=246 (association football, football, soccer, calcio, etc…)
>> sport=220 (rugby)
>> Is anyone going to get insulted that the tag for football/soccer/whatever is
>> 246? No, because it's not a word. Yes, this is less intuitive for us
>> native english speakers, but there is no room for ambiguity. I'm not
>> suggestion we should switch everything to numeric values (would never happen
>> anyway). However, this argument that non-native english speakers have been
>> making for a while is making more and more sense to me.
> nice idea ;-), I am curious how error proof this system could be (have
> a look at all the typos in our data) and how someone will invent a new
> tag and "simply use it" (like generally suggested). Also I'd consider
> not only tagging the value as number but the key as well (e.g. someone
> playing chess might be insulted that chess is considered "sport"). A
> simple list in the wiki would be sufficient ;-)
> and if you invent a new key, simply raise the number.
> e.g. 43542=4
> This sounds like real fun, even though autocompletion might turn out
> to be less useful then...
Well, if we really wanted to do that, it would suffice to have
meta-tags. Each tag would have an UID, and applications could
associate UIDs to human-readable strings, maybe even with
localization. Not that I advocate this.
More information about the Tagging