I see where you’re going with this and now that I understand your use case I think acts_as_taggable isn’t what you want. You can build a hash with categories that can be manipulated by the user, or you can create a model/association between user/categories/images that would probably fit your use case better.
> On Mar 22, 2016, at 2:48 PM, Johnny Stewart <[email protected]> wrote: > > OK, I see what you mean, however, I'd like each user to have their own > categories only and they would likely only have 5 - 10 max for the most > part, as they would only be able to put each photo in one category so > the album analogy would work. So in that sense they are not really tags > like a taxonomy if you get my thinking? So I still think the taggable > gems would maybe be better suited in the case of having a taxonomy where > multiple tags could be used across the site - not just per user, more > like hashtags on tweets or the like? > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rubyonrails-talk/eebd9941fa6f72330e8f765eab7ee4a1%40ruby-forum.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rubyonrails-talk/9754838D-C74F-4797-A5AB-7D54506C2625%40gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
