All of my examples discussing tags were of using something like "actor: robert
redford" or "director: robert redford", so I'm not sure why you would think
that's not the case. Unless there is some way of subdividing one's tag list
I've somehow not seen *anywhere* on LJ, for communities where such tags are
used, you still end up looking through a part of said list where every single
item starts with the same word, and you're then differentiating by the second
and third words in the tag.
I don't personally find it cumbersome, because I understand why and how it's
being done, but I've seen people complain about having to slog through a list
of a few hundred people where not only is it organized alphabetically by first
name rather than last name (e.g. "actor: james coburn" goes with everyone named
"james" rather than "coburn"), but that you have to train yourself to ignore
the "actor:" part first.
What you and I consider "obvious" is a huge pain in the ass to others.
principia_coh
Alexis Carpenter
| > 2. It can be anti-intuitive for people looking through a large
| > set of tags to look for "foo" first rather than just looking
| > for "bar".
|
| No offence, but if you use the right foo, it should be easier.
| If you have "actors" as a category it means I don't need to look
| through all 300 of your tags to find Adrian Pasdar, Robert
| Redford, and Zachary Quinto.
|
| And if the parent level displays clearly, it will be obvious
| where to look.
_______________________________________________
dw-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss
