 ghiberti says: Well worth a read of the source A timely clip for me. Thanks. I find tagging both interesting and frustrating. I have been trying to figure out some way of tagging/labeling my bookmarks and clips that will be functional without creating an unwieldy list. If tags are too general it is difficult to find specific resources, yet if they are too specific it is very easy to end up with a long ever-growing list of specific tags (my problem). Trying to tag in a way that may help other people find what I've saved adds another layer of complexity. Furthermore, the frustration of trying to find resources tagged by other people is sometimes too much for me. Just look at the diversity of tags here on clips, for instance. Here and ... Yeah, I know everybody seems to think that tagging is the be-all and end-all of organizing information, but I am too inconsistent in my use of tags from one day to the next. As a result, i am still picking through masses of tags to find a particular item. Not very efficient, but not really any worse than other systems I've tried I personally think tagging is not really the right solution unless each one of us follow standard set rules (for shared sites). However, I have come to realize that you just tag and tag regardless of how long your list gets and how many duplicates/similar words you have, the point is to not get frustrated by your list and just keep on tagging with common words. I'm in agreement with you about the specific words issue, hence I don't think tagging (though a very attractive concept) is a perfect solution. I actually keep a short html file on my desktop that pulls up a live list of my del.icio.us tags so that I can refer to it when I'm tagging a new site. But it's gotten so long that it's unwieldy. I realize that the Clipmarks team is busy working on a new clipping tool, but one thing I'd like to eventually see on Clipmarks is also a list of the tags we used so we can better standardize our tags. One other thought--LibraryThing's tagging system is also kind of cool, because users can combine tags. For example, we may want to combine the tags "bush" and "bush administration" so that whenever one searches for "bush" one also gets clips tagged with "bush administration". Such features are on my long-term wishlist. Check out the system at RawSugar. That's what I wish we could have here. You can add infinite subtags. For instance, music>jazz>beebop>dizzy gillespie will put your saved link or Dizzy Gillespie related page in a "folder" called "beebop", which is in "jazz" which is in "music", in other words, similar to any file system. Then there is me. I ignore tags altogether and only put them in because they make me. Counterintuitive of what on would expect of a Wurdzgurl I have to keep you all guessing. Eags are usually misused. On other sites I've seen people tag their articles with sex, sexuality, sexy just for the hits. I'll go to read an article on grief and I'll see the tag "sex" and it really irritates me. If I'm clicking a sex tag I want to find sex and if I'm clicking a grief tag I want to find articles on grief and if I'm going to use three exclamation marks I'll use three exclamation marks! Plus I'll throw in a  for good measure. Ever notice how typos seem to come in viral bunches? I've made more today than I usually make in a week, and I've noticed an increase in others here today as well, including your last comment. I know what you're saying about the purposely mischievous taggers, but I'm rarely affected because I rarely search tags. I use them mostly to find my own stuff. I have no idea how many actual exclamation points you just used, thanks to my new Greasemonkey script, but, unfortunately, I don't have one for godawful smileys yet. I have been making a conscientious effort to decrease my exclamation point use as of late. As I meditated on my use of smileys I realized that smileys are my way of marking sarcasm which relates back to one of your clips. How silly of me. |
View the Top Clips from January 20, 2007
|
||
|
|
|||
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|||
