[HN Gopher] What Happened to Tagging? (2019)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What Happened to Tagging? (2019)
        
       Author : Tomte
       Score  : 64 points
       Date   : 2022-05-21 16:09 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (daily.jstor.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (daily.jstor.org)
        
       | PaulHoule wrote:
       | Add enough tags and then you have a gawdawful mess and you need
       | tags to organize your tags.
        
         | WalterGR wrote:
         | I've always thought that Gmail's hierarchical tagging
         | ('folders') is a great solution to the organization problem.
        
           | pc9 wrote:
           | Same. I've making and remaking a bookmarking/notetaking site
           | for my personal use over the years, and this is the solution
           | I landed on. They look like and can be organized like
           | folders, but you can quickly add items to multiple folders. I
           | think it's working well for me so far.
        
             | WalterGR wrote:
             | That's awesome. Just this past week I've started looking
             | for a Chrome extension that does the same.
        
         | coffeeblack wrote:
         | Doesn't that always happen? Some people will push the tools so
         | far that they lose all their initial usefulness.
        
         | bbkane wrote:
         | I think this is a great use case for some algorithm to help you
         | combine tags ( by recognizing synonyms/plurals, text
         | summarization, crowd-spurcing, something else?). Then it could
         | keep you "on the rails" when tagging and periodically ask if
         | you want to combine tags that seem similar.
        
           | foerbert wrote:
           | Perhaps, but after even just a few relatively short attempts
           | to start organizing some of my files with tags I don't think
           | this would be sufficient. I found the meaning of tags
           | frequently started to drift. What I cared about and why just
           | wasn't that consistent. Never mind being consistent with
           | hair-splitting judgement calls in categorization.
           | 
           | And the more you tag, the more difficult it is to fix. Either
           | you retag everything to fit the new standard or you accept
           | that trying to retrieve things by tag will return some weird
           | set defined by the intersection of your changing definition
           | over time and the time at which you applied the tag.
           | 
           | I don't doubt a more structured and principled approach would
           | help, but I found it just ended up soaking up tons of time,
           | and thought, without actually providing much back.
        
       | caseyross wrote:
       | Besides what the article goes into about auto-curation of social
       | feeds reducing self-curation, the counterintuitive answer is that
       | decentralized tagging requires strong centralization to work.
       | 
       | You need:
       | 
       | - agreement on what should be and what should not be tagged in a
       | given domain
       | 
       | - standardized terminology (no multiple variants of tags)
       | 
       | - consistent grammar and formatting across all tags
       | 
       | - software support for tag editing that makes it easy to adhere
       | to established tagging rules
       | 
       | - mechanisms to explain tagging rules to new users, at scale
       | 
       | - mechanisms to punish malicious/spam tagging (e.g. user
       | history/reputation + bans)
       | 
       | Usually, all of these conditions together are only found in
       | highly niche and specialized forums that care a lot about the
       | quality of their content. While most large social platforms today
       | do have some kind of tagging system (e.g. hash tags on
       | Twitter/Instagram), the usefulness of these systems is generally
       | limited due to the inherent difficulties of co-ordinating so many
       | diverse users who have varying interests.
        
         | porker wrote:
         | > Usually, all of these conditions together are only found in
         | highly niche and specialized forums that care a lot about the
         | quality of their content.
         | 
         | Ooh do any of these still exist? If you know of any I'd love
         | the links to look at how they're doing.
         | 
         | I was an inveterate tagger, debating taxonomies and ontologies
         | late into the night (I have now forgotten the difference
         | between the two!) and tried to run a curated forum. Eventually
         | I gave up for most of the reasons you highlight - but mainly
         | because I realised no one was as OCD about classification as I
         | was.
         | 
         | In another life I would have run and catalogued a university
         | library.
        
           | b3morales wrote:
           | Stack Overflow exhibits (or exhibited) all the points that
           | parent mentioned. If you look at [the discussion of tags on
           | the Meta site][0], and especially what's called
           | ["burnination"][1] you'll see these issues being hashed out
           | over time.
           | 
           | To sustain a tagging system like that it takes dedicated and
           | invested individuals, and the corollary of that is that such
           | people tend to generate a _lot_ of discussion.
           | 
           | [0]:https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/tags
           | [1]:https://meta.stackoverflow.com/tags/burninate-
           | request/info
        
       | karaterobot wrote:
       | Right around the time the author was celebrating Tagsgiving, I
       | was in Library School, and tagging was a hot topic around those
       | parts. The consensus there was: "this is great and all, but
       | there's a reason we have controlled vocabularies and
       | classification systems. We'll see, we'll see."
       | 
       | I was all in on the possibilities for "folksonomies" and user
       | tagging. However I have to admit that I have not seen many
       | examples of where uncontrolled tagging was all that useful at
       | scale.
       | 
       | To organize information, you need experts, with training, time,
       | and a reason to get it right. Or, you can do it with an
       | arbitrarily sophisticated, mostly theoretical ML system. But
       | neither of these solutions benefit from having user tags.
        
       | m3kw9 wrote:
       | Apple notes tag is pretty awful.
        
         | jkmcf wrote:
         | OTOH, Federico Viticci (MacStories) just switched to using
         | reminders and tags with smart lists. I haven't attempted this
         | yet, but I think the gist is reminders/notes requires tags in
         | order to get smart folders.
         | 
         | https://club.macstories.net/posts/going-all-in-with-reminder...
        
         | CharlesW wrote:
         | How so? https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT212507
        
       | woojoo666 wrote:
       | I don't think tags died, they just evolved to more user friendly
       | forms. For example, Reddit is basically tags. You post something
       | to one subreddit, or cross-post it to another, and other users
       | who are subscribed will all see it. Perhaps the UX was the main
       | issue in those early days
        
         | jimz wrote:
         | Also, reddit, due to the way it encourages specific niche
         | subreddits to proliferate, inadvertently also showcases, albeit
         | from the tag side instead of the tagged-content side, one use-
         | case where community tagging is both necessary and canonical
         | tags are inconsistent or nonexistent, which is the vast arena
         | of porn, which involves attempts to categorize massive amounts
         | of content that are frequently lacking in tags or tagged
         | minimalistically or even erroneously by studios, and also, can
         | involve specific preferences that aren't necessarily even
         | considered as something that needs to be tagged until someone
         | starts a subreddit on some really obscure aspect of a clip and
         | then, suddenly it turns out there's a community and demand for
         | such a tag.
         | 
         | Some automated tagging solutions do work on some aspects of the
         | tag deficiencies - performers using different stage names, for
         | example. However, just as obscenity is defined on a "I'll know
         | it when I see it" basis, individual and perhaps previously
         | unnamed categorizations pop up frequently enough that there's
         | no realistic way to anticipate every future community tag that
         | may come about. There's also inconsistencies as to how
         | currently-used tags are defined, and even in the generally more
         | centralized and almost over-specific niches of the industry in
         | Japan, with consistent and unique product codes for reference,
         | you still don't get a single consistent studio tag system, even
         | for their domestic mainstream market. And language certainly
         | factors into all this, as well as culture. It's already evident
         | that some tags translate and some simply don't, either because
         | there is no word for it in the other language, or the
         | categorization loses some aspect of cultural significance in
         | the translation process that makes it end result valid but also
         | nonsensical. Some degree of community curation to augment even
         | a relatively consistent, centralized, and comprehensive
         | canonical source.
         | 
         | There are a few projects on Github that are hashing out
         | compatible systems for at least the English language (and it
         | appears that projects in Korean and Chinese exist too, also on
         | Github). This is definitely an arena that is organic,
         | disorganized, and even if in the future can mostly be
         | automated, will always have room for community curation, and is
         | actually actively being worked out and evolving in real time.
         | Tags, or community curation at large, will likely persist as
         | content, the market, culture, CV/classification tech, and mores
         | change as time goes on. Definitely not dying.
        
       | seunosewa wrote:
       | I loved del.icio.us. It was a core part of my browsing
       | experience. Any useful link I stumbled upon got tagged and saved.
       | The popular links were very useful, too. Then it got sold to
       | people who couldn't figure out how to make money off it without
       | ruining it.
       | 
       | I still miss the functionality of being able to quickly find
       | every interesting webpage I've ever seen (using tags). A way to
       | supply that functionality in the modern world would be a visited
       | pages search feature on Google or Chrome. Or a search feature for
       | the content of pages I've bookmarked.
        
         | wvenable wrote:
         | Am I missing something because I use Firefox? I bookmark and
         | tag every interesting site I come across. Is tagging not a
         | thing in Chrome?
        
         | kordlessagain wrote:
         | I'm building a personal search engine/document management
         | system that uses tags similar to how del.icio.us worked. URLs
         | and screenshots can be saved via the browser, or by instructing
         | the system to crawl it (which gets done with
         | Firefox/webdriver). It's a like a split brained version of the
         | Grub crawler. It also supports uploading PDFs and images.
         | 
         | Tags, objects, labels, synthesized commentary, etc. are
         | provided by machine learning models and GPT3. Eventually the
         | pipelines will be customizable, so running a plant
         | identification model will be possible. Full text search and
         | analytics is provided via a customized Solr deployment manager.
         | I've built a unique UI for it based on my original cut of a
         | simple timeseries interface at Loggly. Love using it, but have
         | no idea if others will want to pay for it. I seriously hate
         | ads, trackers and user privacy violations.
         | merry-zebra|> !crawl
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31459103       merry-
         | zebra|> Please wait while I index
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31459103.       merry-
         | zebra|> Site has been indexed. An image of the site will be
         | added in ~10 seconds.       merry-zebra|> ...       merry-
         | zebra|> updated 2022-05-21T18:55:06Z       merry-zebra|> ID
         | UmXyyk3tZJdGZW4uv       merry-zebra|> title What Happened to
         | Tagging? (2019) |       Hacker News       merry-zebra|>
         | description The article discusses the potential reasons why
         | "tagging" (i.e. adding labels to content for organizational
         | purposes) has declined in popularity in recent years, despite
         | its usefulness.       merry-zebra|> URL
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31459103       merry-
         | zebra|> Tags #What, #Happened, #Tagging, #2019, #HackerNews,
         | #News       merry-zebra|> ...       merry-zebra|> To search me
         | for the document, click on one of the action links.
         | system=> Do you have any comments about this webpage, @merry-
         | zebra?       merry-zebra|> I find tagging to be extremely
         | useful for organizing content. I think the decline in
         | popularity is likely due to the fact that it can be time
         | consuming to tag everything, and people are often lazy.
         | However, I think it is worth the effort to tag things, as it
         | makes it much easier to find what you're looking for later on.
        
           | dchuk wrote:
           | Is this a project you intend only for yourself? Or is it
           | going to be a product?
        
         | spookthesunset wrote:
         | Completely agree. Delicious was like the perfect bookmark
         | manager. Then it went to complete shit and ever since then I've
         | barely bookmarked anything.
         | 
         | Honestly though I don't think bookmarks serve much of a purpose
         | anymore. Like I'll just search my history if I need something
         | specific. Or maybe I've just forgotten how useful they are.
        
         | wincy wrote:
         | Why couldn't such a thing be a local browser extension or
         | similar?
        
         | flir wrote:
         | > A way to supply that functionality in the modern world would
         | be a visited pages search feature on Google or Chrome
         | 
         | I've been wondering about a plugin that does that. Maybe built
         | over this? https://lunrjs.com/
         | 
         | I am ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN this does not yet exist.
         | 
         | (Easier to type that last sentence than actually Google for
         | it).
        
         | tlavoie wrote:
         | Pinboard (https://pinboard.in/) is still a thing, and the
         | developer bought the deli.icio.us domain too I think.
         | 
         | In any case, it has at least replicated the del.icio.us
         | functionality, and then added more, such as archiving page
         | contents. The tags are still there too, and it prompts with
         | other users' tags when you add a bookmark. Oh, and an API,
         | which is very useful for programmatic use of the data once
         | saved.
        
           | panic wrote:
           | Pinboard doesn't have the social features that del.icio.us
           | had--you can't see the list of others who bookmarked a link,
           | for example.
        
       | achairapart wrote:
       | For sometime there were also "machine tags", basically a triple
       | tag invented (I think) at Flickr[0]. It was an interesting
       | concept, you could automate relationships between different
       | contexts, for example between Flickr and Last.fm[1].
       | 
       | I used it for a while, then I always wondered why nothing similar
       | has ever emerged, maybe because after the first wave of "social
       | sharing" excitement of web 2.0, every walled garden has basically
       | double locked their gates. And this is maybe what happened to
       | tagging in general.
       | 
       | [0]: http://tagaholic.me/2009/03/26/what-are-machine-tags.html
       | 
       | [1]: https://code.flickr.net/2008/08/28/machine-tags-lastfm-
       | and-r...
        
         | pyinstallwoes wrote:
         | I'm not sure I'm following, how is the machine tag format
         | setting up automatic relationships and contexts? How is it
         | helpful and how might you see it being effective today?
         | 
         | Edit: only saw the first link. Seems second link breaks it down
         | but can't review it yet. Got pulled away. Thanks!
        
         | bastawhiz wrote:
         | The concept of machine tags is the core premise of RDF. RDF is
         | essentially the standardized way of describing relationships in
         | a structured way (in XML). In fact, an early version of RSS was
         | based on RDF (RSS 0.9 stood for "RDF site summary).
         | 
         | One of the downsides is that it's pretty hard for "average"
         | folks to produce these feeds. There's a steep learning curve
         | for modeling the relationships. Getting other sites to agree on
         | a format, use it, and maintain it without breaking
         | compatibility was hard.
        
       | asplake wrote:
       | Killed (at least for me) by browser history (and then the web of
       | course) being so easily searchable
        
         | 7fYZ7mJh3RNKNaG wrote:
         | Although that might have been the case some time ago, nowadays
         | browser history is definitely not easily searchable unless you
         | only need results from the last 90 days. Chrome purges them
         | after that, and Firefox has a similar limit.
        
           | johnny22 wrote:
           | I just have my history config set to:
           | 
           | Firefox will "remember history"
           | 
           | and my history goes back to 2019 when i started this new
           | firefox profile.
        
       | cratermoon wrote:
       | Curated tags, including canonizing one variation of a tag and
       | making all the others with the same meaning synonyms:
       | https://archiveofourown.org/wrangling_guidelines/16
       | 
       | Of course, where a single word has two or more meanings, synonyms
       | don't make sense, so go with Wikipedia-style disambiguation.
       | 
       | Also be aware if your community has specialized jargon, uses
       | multiple human languages, patois, creole, dialects, or pidgin.
       | 
       | Allow multi-word tags, but settle on a single casing/separation
       | and enforce it: camelCase, snake_case, and kebab-case are some
       | choices.
       | 
       | Prefer plurals "landscapes" over singulars "landscape".
       | 
       | See also
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20050426210018/http://ideant.typ...
        
       | tiffanyh wrote:
       | Tagging never died.
       | 
       | "Tags" became known as "Labels".
       | 
       | Labels are core functionality of Gmail, GitHub Issues, and more
       | today.
        
       | stareatgoats wrote:
       | Tagging requires mental energy and some level of abstraction
       | prowess - and might still be misleading. Social media is geared
       | towards making the user expend as little mental energy as
       | possible - and then organize the information they provide anyway
       | for the advertisers using behavioral patterns or some variant of
       | AI. This is probably considered by the industry to provide more
       | reliable information - its like the difference between asking
       | people to explain ethical behavior compared to recording what
       | people actually do in reality.
       | 
       | So, we have a "tagging" model driven by advertising needs, that
       | discourages our own need to tag (intellectually categorize) the
       | content we consume. Instead of moving forwards, towards a more
       | accurate tagging system that supports reflection and concept
       | organization, it seems to me (in my pessimistic moments) that we
       | are moving backwards into an online world where the only ones
       | that know what we are doing are the machines.
        
       | japhyr wrote:
       | Building an effective tagging system can be much harder than
       | people realize. I once worked on a tagging system for a
       | collection of math problems. I thought I could code a simple
       | tagging model, and let users tag their own math problems, and it
       | would become much easier to find the problems you're most
       | interested in.
       | 
       | Then I realized that tags like _algebra 1_ , _Algebra 1_ ,
       | _Algebra I_ , _Alg I_ , and all other variations should mean the
       | same thing. So I started to develop a closed set of tags. That
       | led to a fascinating rabbit hole about taxonomies that I don't
       | even remember how to speak about clearly at this point.
       | 
       | That project is still a work in progress, and it's left me with
       | immense respect for people who build well-structured systems that
       | involve tagging.
        
         | NicoJuicy wrote:
         | I just used synonyms and a tag hierarchy ( nested sets).
         | 
         | Works pretty well.
        
           | japhyr wrote:
           | I ended up building out a hierarchy as well. But figuring out
           | the structure of that hierarchy was not trivial at all. How
           | does the name of a repeatable class (Algebra 1) fit with the
           | name of a specific class (Algebra 1 Fall 2020 Section 2)? How
           | does that relate to an area of math like algebra, geometry,
           | number theory? How does that relate to things like context
           | (ie problems about Minecraft, Lego, Physics, etc.)
           | 
           | I developed a closed system of tags, and then gave people the
           | ability to define aliases.
        
             | cratermoon wrote:
             | closed system and aliases are good. Taxonomies, not so
             | much. See https://oc.ac.ge/file.php/16/_1_Shirky_2005_Ontol
             | ogy_is_Over... and
             | http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january06/guy/01guy.html
        
         | mgdlbp wrote:
         | Two impressive site-wide systems I've seen are the categories
         | of Wikimedia Commons (multimedia) and tags of Archive of Our
         | Own (fanfiction). The Commons guideline[0] elucidates its
         | system and interesting ontological theory well. It's scope is
         | extremely broad, aiming to simultaneously include any possibly
         | useful categorization scheme,[1] and overall is a fairly
         | freeform (ideally) directed acyclic graph. Variations are
         | handled with redirects and disambiguation pages in a typical
         | wiki manner, with the limitation that individual category uses
         | must have the canonical name. Ao3, in contrast, has a schema of
         | sorts, and synonyms are made equivalent during resolution (its
         | tags FAQ[2] is also an interesting read).
         | 
         | I tried to write a more thorough comment but also struggled
         | with being coherent. Thus, some ideas, only briefly:
         | 
         | - At an even higher level, the web itself and the overlapping
         | userbases/communities ('intersectionality', without the
         | discrimination--the original set-theory kind?) of individual
         | sites can also be considered a way of organizing content
         | 
         | - Thus, analogously: Search engines replaced directories and
         | webrings as algorithms did tags. The present SEO meta,
         | though...
         | 
         | - Generalizing from Commons, all Wikimedia wikis (Wikipedia,
         | etc.) have parallel category structures, only less developed
         | due to the greater reliance on links. So do most wikis in
         | general, though Wikimedia also unifies categorization and
         | structured data with Wikidata. From there are knowledge graphs
         | and databases in general, wrapping back around to Google trying
         | to determine the Knowledge Graph item that each query refers
         | to.
         | 
         | [0] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Categories
         | 
         | [1] all the typical keying on depicted people, things, times,
         | and places, plus the ways that we categorize those. Niches from
         | 'horizontal bicolor blue and white flags' to 'Luxembourgish
         | pronunciation by gender', 'trams on route 709', 'ships with 6
         | funnels'. There's a tool (now called vCat) to visualize
         | categories, some outputs here:
         | https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_catgra...
         | 
         | [2] https://archiveofourown.org/faq/tags
         | 
         | Edit: specific examples
        
           | mro_name wrote:
           | > I tried to write a more thorough comment but also struggled
           | with being coherent.
           | 
           | how fitting.
           | 
           | I guess it's always about neighbourhoods. In your street, in
           | your pew, in your bookshelf, inside your brain, in your
           | zettelkasten.
        
           | duskwuff wrote:
           | > tags of Archive of Our Own (fanfiction)
           | 
           | On a similar note, Danbooru-style image boards often have
           | highly developed tagging systems, ranging from tags for
           | specific characters or artists to tags for art styles, poses,
           | or even specific features which happen to appear in the
           | artwork (like "hat bow" or "blue eyes").
        
             | mgdlbp wrote:
             | Just for fun, here are your examples applied to Commons
             | (and a conjecture that tag systems naturally converge as
             | they become more fine-grained):
             | 
             | https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cat:Wikipe-tan
             | 
             | (NSFW-ish[0]) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cat:Drawin
             | gs_by_User:Seed...
             | 
             | https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cat:Demoscene
             | 
             | https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cat:Paintings_of_couples
             | ,...
             | 
             | https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cat:Blue_eyes
             | 
             | https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cat:Bow_hats
             | 
             | There's also a tool to intersect or subtract categories
             | hidden in the dropdown of the 'Good pictures' button at the
             | top right.
             | 
             | [0] (NSFW-ish) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seedfeeder
        
       | dahdum wrote:
       | I'm not sure tags died, TikTok certainly seems to be built around
       | tags and it has over a billion monthly users. They are also key
       | to Instagram discovery but feel a little less important there,
       | though I don't care much for that platform and could be wrong.
        
       | andybak wrote:
       | Obligatory: https://people.well.com/user/doctorow/metacrap.htm
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | tandav wrote:
       | All you need is links. Tags are just links to pages which don't
       | exists. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30915520
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-05-21 23:01 UTC)