Bug 5653 - suggestions for browsing / tagging
suggestions for browsing / tagging
Status: CLOSED FIXED
Product: openclipart.org
Classification: Unclassified
Component: website
unspecified
x86 (IA32) Linux (All)
: high enhancement
Assigned To: default user for a product
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2006-01-19 10:20 UTC by Rafa³ Próchniak
Modified: 2006-09-06 20:15 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
i915 platform:
i915 features:


Attachments
This is the file that Adrian originally posted. (15.63 KB, image/svg+xml)
2006-01-22 11:19 UTC, Jon Phillips
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Rafa³ Próchniak 2006-01-19 10:20:51 UTC
Just a suggestion: as tagging becomes (has become?) a default way of
categorizing things (look at flickr or any image-browsing software), why not
implement it at openclipart.org web site? Of course, there is search and new
keyword search (beta - no success for my searches), but still browsing by tags
may also be more effective. 

Take this as an example: a rubber toy duck is now located in "recreation/ toys".
Why not tag it also as "animal" and "bird"? There are enough strange creatures
there, so one more would not make a difference. 

Another thing (just a side-effect): maybe upper level categories should show all
cliparts from lower level as well. If I want to see all animals, I will take my
time browsing through tens of pages (instead of entering each and every
sub-category), if I want to be more specific, I select birds (or whatever) at once.
Comment 1 Nathan Eady 2006-01-20 03:51:54 UTC
Allowing users to add or adjust keywords via the website is something that we
would like to implement, but currently we do not have the infrastructure in
place to make it happen (and, Copious Free Time has also been wanting of late).
 Still, it is definitely a TODO item.

> upper level categories should show all cliparts from lower level as well.

There are a couple of reasons not to do that.  First, it would make the lower
level categories redundant and unnecessary.  Second, it would flood certain
upper level categories with so many images that it would in practice not be
useful to browse through them.  

It seems better to have the subcategories listed within each category, followed
by any "loose" images that do not belong in any particular subcategory.  This is
the way Yahoo's web directory has always done for instance.

However, the images in the subcategories could still be tagged with the keywords
for all the categories they are within, which would be useful when people want
to crossreference two keywords, e.g., if I want all the images that have both
'animal' and 'cartoon' keywords, I may not care whether they're loose under
"animals" or nested under "birds" or one of the other subcategories within
"animals".  (Currently I don't know whether there is a 'cartoon' keyword in use,
but the current state of the collection is one thing and the example of how we
would want things to work is another.)
Comment 2 Jon Phillips 2006-01-22 11:19:48 UTC
Created attachment 4428 [details]
This is the file that Adrian originally posted.
Comment 3 ryanlerch 2006-09-06 19:07:35 UTC
resloved by the introduction of cchost, it uses tagggs!