Tags with multiple words?

[bruins1961]

I found a thread on this back in Sep/Oct 2007 but nothing newer.  Is
there going to be a way to incorporate multiword tags using a space
delimiter?  For example, I want some of my tags to be "incident
response", "computer forensics", "data recovery".  I guess I just am
too stubborn to switch to say incident_response, incident-response, or
incidentresponse.  I'm so used to searching, thru database or the
Internet, using the normal boolean operators and styles... "incident
response" AND ""data recovery" as opposed to guessing how someone
might have formatted their tag terms - like above (incident_response,
etc.)  Thanx!!

.jim.

[Britta Gustafson]

Hi Jim,

Del.icio.us has had space-separated tags since the beginning, but we're
still considering also adding support for comma-separated tags (or
something like that) someday.

For those who are curious, here's that old thread with discussion of
these and related issues:

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/message/1069

Here are the relevant responses in that thread from Joshua and Nick:

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/message/1071
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ydn-delicious/message/1624

Britta
Del.icio.us community manager intern

--- In ydn-delicious@..., "bruins1961" <sparkyny@...> wrote:

>
> I found a thread on this back in Sep/Oct 2007 but nothing newer.  Is
> there going to be a way to incorporate multiword tags using a space
> delimiter?  For example, I want some of my tags to be "incident
> response", "computer forensics", "data recovery".  I guess I just am
> too stubborn to switch to say incident_response, incident-response, or
> incidentresponse.  I'm so used to searching, thru database or the
> Internet, using the normal boolean operators and styles... "incident
> response" AND ""data recovery" as opposed to guessing how someone
> might have formatted their tag terms - like above (incident_response,
> etc.)  Thanx!!
>
> .jim.
>

[betaone4379]

--- In ydn-delicious@..., "bruins1961" <sparkyny@...> wrote:

>
> I found a thread on this back in Sep/Oct 2007 but nothing newer.  Is
> there going to be a way to incorporate multiword tags using a space
> delimiter?  For example, I want some of my tags to be "incident
> response", "computer forensics", "data recovery".  I guess I just am
> too stubborn to switch to say incident_response, incident-response, or
> incidentresponse.  I'm so used to searching, thru database or the
> Internet, using the normal boolean operators and styles... "incident
> response" AND ""data recovery" as opposed to guessing how someone
> might have formatted their tag terms - like above (incident_response,
> etc.)  Thanx!!
>
> .jim.
>

You are encouraged to tag them as incidentresponse

With a space it is going to be complicated when i actually wanted two
tags: incident and response. Searching for "incident response" is
going to be troublesome as well because you will have to probably wrap
it using quotation marks to say you are actually looking for "incident
response" not just "incident" OR "response. Currently you can also
search "incident+response" which will filter your bookmarks to all
having "incident" AND "response".

[Kevin Curry]

I've used them all and spaces are best.  It's much more versatile and
still maintains the ability to get what you want specifically.  Getting
all bookmarks tagged "incident response" is semantically the same as
incident+response.  In either case, there's no chance "incident reports"
will never appear in the results.  Key phrases (groups of words
separated by some other delimiter) create all sorts of problems (as
others have alluded, stated) without much benefit.  In fact you're not
optimizing your vocabulary when you are using key phrases because you'll
end up needing a lot more terms.  I can pull up any subset with
combinations of only the 3 terms:  incident, response, reports.  On the
other hand, other methods lead to...someone help me with the math...it's
exponential the terms you need to cover all the combinations of
incident, response, reports, incident response, incident reports,
incident response , etc...

 

I've mostly stopped using compound words except in a few cases where I
think other people are using them.  In that case I usually tag both
ways:  social network SocialNetwork.

 

That way I can also have social+calendar...or whatever.

 

del.icio.ous dev team:  don't change anything.  If you do, let us choose
our delimiter.  I choose space.

 

Kevin M. Curry

Bridgeborn

757.437.5000

________________________________

From: ydn-delicious@...
[mailto:ydn-delicious@...] On Behalf Of betaone4379
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 9:36 PM
To: ydn-delicious@...
Subject: [ydn-delicious] Re: Tags with multiple words?

 

--- In ydn-delicious@...
<mailto:ydn-delicious%40yahoogroups.com> , "bruins1961" <sparkyny@...>
wrote:

>
> I found a thread on this back in Sep/Oct 2007 but nothing newer. Is
> there going to be a way to incorporate multiword tags using a space
> delimiter? For example, I want some of my tags to be "incident
> response", "computer forensics", "data recovery". I guess I just am
> too stubborn to switch to say incident_response, incident-response, or
> incidentresponse. I'm so used to searching, thru database or the
> Internet, using the normal boolean operators and styles... "incident
> response" AND ""data recovery" as opposed to guessing how someone
> might have formatted their tag terms - like above (incident_response,
> etc.) Thanx!!
>
> .jim.
>

You are encouraged to tag them as incidentresponse

With a space it is going to be complicated when i actually wanted two
tags: incident and response. Searching for "incident response" is
going to be troublesome as well because you will have to probably wrap
it using quotation marks to say you are actually looking for "incident
response" not just "incident" OR "response. Currently you can also
search "incident+response" which will filter your bookmarks to all
having "incident" AND "response".

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[telarson]

bruins1961 <> wrote:

> I found a thread on this back in Sep/Oct 2007 but nothing newer. Is
> there going to be a way to incorporate multiword tags using a space
> delimiter? For example, I want some of my tags to be "incident
> response", "computer forensics", "data recovery". I guess I just am
> too stubborn to switch to say incident_response, incident-response, or
> incidentresponse. I'm so used to searching, thru database or the
> Internet, using the normal boolean operators and styles... "incident
> response" AND ""data recovery" as opposed to guessing how someone
> might have formatted their tag terms - like above (incident_response,
> etc.) Thanx!!

Go ahead and tag them that way.  Then search for
"incident+response+data+recovery".  Boolean AND is the only operator Del
understands, so this usage fits perfectly.

I know that it seems tempting to think of an "incident response" as a
separate "thing" from whatever else you might tag, but Del's tagging
model allows for flexibility.  This way, if you want to search for
anything relating to an "incident" or a "response" you will find your
incident responses too.  If you want only incident responses (as opposed
to other kinds of responses, or other incident-related stuff), that's
what "incident+response" does.  

I've never seen the need for a "single multi-word tag" when additional
tags refine my search to get exactly what I want.

Tim
--
Tim Larson        AMT2 Unix Systems Administrator
    InterCall, a division of West Corporation

               Eschew obfuscation!

[Henrik Nyh]

On 2/26/08, Larson, Timothy E. <telarson@...> wrote:
> I know that it seems tempting to think of an "incident response" as a
>  separate "thing" from whatever else you might tag, but Del's tagging
>  model allows for flexibility.  This way, if you want to search for
>  anything relating to an "incident" or a "response" you will find your
>  incident responses too.  If you want only incident responses (as opposed
>  to other kinds of responses, or other incident-related stuff), that's
>  what "incident+response" does.

That's not quite true.

Say A should be tagged: incident response, xx
And B: blah incident, bleh response

then if you just space-separate everything, searching for
"incident+response" will find another kind of response (B with its
"bleh response") and another kind of incident ("blah incident").

That said, I'd follow the del.icio.us convention and use
"incidentresponse" etc. To me the current system is Good Enough.

[Zerex71]

My two cents' worth on this: I have resigned myself to using tags like:

music.genres.jazz.John-Coltrane

It does two things for me.  One, it gives me a desired hierarchy which I am comfortable with and two, it at least allows me to get around the space-delimiting problem.  In an ideal world maybe there would be a way to quote elements of a tag such that you would not need to put a dash or something between it, but it's really not something I lose sleep over.  (Perhaps they can start "qualifying" sub-parts of a tag?  For example, the first three elements in my example are not "separated" but the last one is...maybe each tag has a subpart with a "properName" attribute?  Who knows...)

I'm not saying it's great, but it works for me.  Your mileage may vary.  I use delicious primarily as a tool for myself, not for others, and I never search other delicious tags of other people.  (I spend way too much time in front of a computer as it is; the last thing I need is yet another reason to keep doing so).

Mike

----- Original Message ----
From: Henrik Nyh <henrik@...>
To: ydn-delicious@...
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:09:34 AM
Subject: Re: [ydn-delicious] Tags with multiple words?










 


   
            On 2/26/08, Larson, Timothy E. <telarson@west. com> wrote:

> I know that it seems tempting to think of an "incident response" as a

>  separate "thing" from whatever else you might tag, but Del's tagging

>  model allows for flexibility.  This way, if you want to search for

>  anything relating to an "incident" or a "response" you will find your

>  incident responses too.  If you want only incident responses (as opposed

>  to other kinds of responses, or other incident-related stuff), that's

>  what "incident+response" does.



That's not quite true.



Say A should be tagged: incident response, xx

And B: blah incident, bleh response



then if you just space-separate everything, searching for

"incident+response" will find another kind of response (B with its

"bleh response") and another kind of incident ("blah incident").



That said, I'd follow the del.icio.us convention and use

"incidentresponse" etc. To me the current system is Good Enough.



   
 

   
   




<!--

#ygrp-mkp{
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:14px 0px;padding:0px 14px;}
#ygrp-mkp hr{
border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}
#ygrp-mkp #hd{
color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:bold;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0px;}
#ygrp-mkp #ads{
margin-bottom:10px;}
#ygrp-mkp .ad{
padding:0 0;}
#ygrp-mkp .ad a{
color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}
-->



<!--

#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc{
font-family:Arial;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc #hd{
margin:10px 0px;font-weight:bold;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc .ad{
margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}
-->



<!--

#ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
#ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}
#ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
#ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
#ygrp-text{
font-family:Georgia;
}
#ygrp-text p{
margin:0 0 1em 0;}
#ygrp-tpmsgs{
font-family:Arial;
clear:both;}
#ygrp-vitnav{
padding-top:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;margin:0;}
#ygrp-vitnav a{
padding:0 1px;}
#ygrp-actbar{
clear:both;margin:25px 0;white-space:nowrap;color:#666;text-align:right;}
#ygrp-actbar .left{
float:left;white-space:nowrap;}
.bld{font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-grft{
font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;padding:15px 0;}
#ygrp-ft{
font-family:verdana;font-size:77%;border-top:1px solid #666;
padding:5px 0;
}
#ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
padding-bottom:10px;}

#ygrp-vital{
background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:2px 0 8px 8px;}
#ygrp-vital #vithd{
font-size:77%;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:bold;color:#333;text-transform:uppercase;}
#ygrp-vital ul{
padding:0;margin:2px 0;}
#ygrp-vital ul li{
list-style-type:none;clear:both;border:1px solid #e0ecee;
}
#ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
font-weight:bold;color:#ff7900;float:right;width:2em;text-align:right;padding-right:.5em;}
#ygrp-vital ul li .cat{
font-weight:bold;}
#ygrp-vital a{
text-decoration:none;}

#ygrp-vital a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;}

#ygrp-sponsor #hd{
color:#999;font-size:77%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov{
padding:6px 13px;background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{
padding:0 0 0 8px;margin:0;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li{
list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;font-size:77%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{
text-decoration:none;font-size:130%;}
#ygrp-sponsor #nc{
background-color:#eee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:0 8px;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad{
padding:8px 0;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{
font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold;color:#628c2a;font-size:100%;line-height:122%;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad a{
text-decoration:none;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{
text-decoration:underline;}
#ygrp-sponsor .ad p{
margin:0;}
o{font-size:0;}
.MsoNormal{
margin:0 0 0 0;}
#ygrp-text tt{
font-size:120%;}
blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}
.replbq{margin:4;}
-->







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Britta Gustafson]

I should have known that this issue would bring up the eternal Tag
Debate. :)

The best tag system is the one that works for you personally. There's no
wrong way to tag; metadata is naturally messy.

I have an idiosyncratic tagging method that works well because I've used
it for years and I'm very familiar with it. I think that's true for many
Delicious users: we think our own tag systems are great because we're
familiar with them and skilled at using them. So I recommend picking a
system that feels good and sticking with it, whatever it is!

Britta
Del.icio.us community manager intern

--- In ydn-delicious@..., Michael Feher <mfeher00@...> wrote:
>
> My two cents' worth on this: I have resigned myself to using tags like:
>
> music.genres.jazz.John-Coltrane
>
> It does two things for me.  One, it gives me a desired hierarchy which I am comfortable
with and two, it at least allows me to get around the space-delimiting problem.  In an
ideal world maybe there would be a way to quote elements of a tag such that you would
not need to put a dash or something between it, but it's really not something I lose sleep
over.  (Perhaps they can start "qualifying" sub-parts of a tag?  For example, the first three
elements in my example are not "separated" but the last one is...maybe each tag has a
subpart with a "properName" attribute?  Who knows...)
>
> I'm not saying it's great, but it works for me.  Your mileage may vary.  I use delicious
primarily as a tool for myself, not for others, and I never search other delicious tags of
other people.  (I spend way too much time in front of a computer as it is; the last thing I
need is yet another reason to keep doing so).

>
> Mike
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Henrik Nyh <henrik@...>
> To: ydn-delicious@...
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:09:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [ydn-delicious] Tags with multiple words?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>    
>             On 2/26/08, Larson, Timothy E. <telarson@west. com> wrote:
>
> > I know that it seems tempting to think of an "incident response" as a
>
> >  separate "thing" from whatever else you might tag, but Del's tagging
>
> >  model allows for flexibility.  This way, if you want to search for
>
> >  anything relating to an "incident" or a "response" you will find your
>
> >  incident responses too.  If you want only incident responses (as opposed
>
> >  to other kinds of responses, or other incident-related stuff), that's
>
> >  what "incident+response" does.
>
>
>
> That's not quite true.
>
>
>
> Say A should be tagged: incident response, xx
>
> And B: blah incident, bleh response
>
>
>
> then if you just space-separate everything, searching for
>
> "incident+response" will find another kind of response (B with its
>
> "bleh response") and another kind of incident ("blah incident").
>
>
>
> That said, I'd follow the del.icio.us convention and use
>
> "incidentresponse" etc. To me the current system is Good Enough.
>
>
>
>    
>  
>
>    
>    
>
>
>
>
> <!--
>
> #ygrp-mkp{
> border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:14px 0px;padding:0px 14px;}
> #ygrp-mkp hr{
> border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}
> #ygrp-mkp #hd{
> color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:bold;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0px;}
> #ygrp-mkp #ads{
> margin-bottom:10px;}
> #ygrp-mkp .ad{
> padding:0 0;}
> #ygrp-mkp .ad a{
> color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}
> -->
>
>
>
> <!--
>
> #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc{
> font-family:Arial;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc #hd{
> margin:10px 0px;font-weight:bold;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc .ad{
> margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}
> -->
>
>
>
> <!--
>
> #ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}
> #ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
> #ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}
> #ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
> #ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
> #ygrp-text{
> font-family:Georgia;
> }
> #ygrp-text p{
> margin:0 0 1em 0;}
> #ygrp-tpmsgs{
> font-family:Arial;
> clear:both;}
> #ygrp-vitnav{
> padding-top:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;margin:0;}
> #ygrp-vitnav a{
> padding:0 1px;}
> #ygrp-actbar{
> clear:both;margin:25px 0;white-space:nowrap;color:#666;text-align:right;}
> #ygrp-actbar .left{
> float:left;white-space:nowrap;}
> .bld{font-weight:bold;}
> #ygrp-grft{
> font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;padding:15px 0;}
> #ygrp-ft{
> font-family:verdana;font-size:77%;border-top:1px solid #666;
> padding:5px 0;
> }
> #ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
> padding-bottom:10px;}
>
> #ygrp-vital{
> background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:2px 0 8px 8px;}
> #ygrp-vital #vithd{
> font-size:77%;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:bold;color:#333;text-

transform:uppercase;}
> #ygrp-vital ul{
> padding:0;margin:2px 0;}
> #ygrp-vital ul li{
> list-style-type:none;clear:both;border:1px solid #e0ecee;
> }
> #ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
> font-weight:bold;color:#ff7900;float:right;width:2em;text-align:right;padding-
right:.5em;}

> #ygrp-vital ul li .cat{
> font-weight:bold;}
> #ygrp-vital a{
> text-decoration:none;}
>
> #ygrp-vital a:hover{
> text-decoration:underline;}
>
> #ygrp-sponsor #hd{
> color:#999;font-size:77%;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ov{
> padding:6px 13px;background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{
> padding:0 0 0 8px;margin:0;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ov li{
> list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;font-size:77%;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{
> text-decoration:none;font-size:130%;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #nc{
> background-color:#eee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:0 8px;}
> #ygrp-sponsor .ad{
> padding:8px 0;}
> #ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{
> font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold;color:#628c2a;font-size:100%;line-height:122%;}
> #ygrp-sponsor .ad a{
> text-decoration:none;}
> #ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{
> text-decoration:underline;}
> #ygrp-sponsor .ad p{
> margin:0;}
> o{font-size:0;}
> .MsoNormal{
> margin:0 0 0 0;}
> #ygrp-text tt{
> font-size:120%;}
> blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}
> .replbq{margin:4;}
> -->
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[Kevin Curry]

But what about categories?!  :-) (KIDDING!)

 

Kevin M. Curry

Bridgeborn

________________________________

From: ydn-delicious@...
[mailto:ydn-delicious@...] On Behalf Of Britta Gustafson
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 4:38 PM
To: ydn-delicious@...
Subject: [ydn-delicious] Re: Tags with multiple words?

 

I should have known that this issue would bring up the eternal Tag
Debate. :)

The best tag system is the one that works for you personally. There's no
wrong way to tag; metadata is naturally messy.

I have an idiosyncratic tagging method that works well because I've used
it for years and I'm very familiar with it. I think that's true for many
Delicious users: we think our own tag systems are great because we're
familiar with them and skilled at using them. So I recommend picking a
system that feels good and sticking with it, whatever it is!

Britta
Del.icio.us community manager intern

--- In ydn-delicious@...
<mailto:ydn-delicious%40yahoogroups.com> , Michael Feher <mfeher00@...>
wrote:
>
> My two cents' worth on this: I have resigned myself to using tags
like:
>
> music.genres.jazz.John-Coltrane
>
> It does two things for me. One, it gives me a desired hierarchy which
I am comfortable
with and two, it at least allows me to get around the space-delimiting
problem. In an
ideal world maybe there would be a way to quote elements of a tag such
that you would
not need to put a dash or something between it, but it's really not
something I lose sleep
over. (Perhaps they can start "qualifying" sub-parts of a tag? For
example, the first three
elements in my example are not "separated" but the last one is...maybe
each tag has a
subpart with a "properName" attribute? Who knows...)
>
> I'm not saying it's great, but it works for me. Your mileage may vary.
I use delicious
primarily as a tool for myself, not for others, and I never search other
delicious tags of
other people. (I spend way too much time in front of a computer as it
is; the last thing I
need is yet another reason to keep doing so).
>
> Mike
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Henrik Nyh <henrik@...>
> To: ydn-delicious@...
<mailto:ydn-delicious%40yahoogroups.com>

> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 10:09:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [ydn-delicious] Tags with multiple words?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2/26/08, Larson, Timothy E. <telarson@west. com> wrote:
>
> > I know that it seems tempting to think of an "incident response" as

a
>
> > separate "thing" from whatever else you might tag, but Del's tagging
>
> > model allows for flexibility. This way, if you want to search for
>
> > anything relating to an "incident" or a "response" you will find
your
>
> > incident responses too. If you want only incident responses (as
opposed
>
> > to other kinds of responses, or other incident-related stuff),
that's

>
> > what "incident+response" does.
>
>
>
> That's not quite true.
>
>
>
> Say A should be tagged: incident response, xx
>
> And B: blah incident, bleh response
>
>
>
> then if you just space-separate everything, searching for
>
> "incident+response" will find another kind of response (B with its
>
> "bleh response") and another kind of incident ("blah incident").
>
>
>
> That said, I'd follow the del.icio.us convention and use
>
> "incidentresponse" etc. To me the current system is Good Enough.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <!--
>
> #ygrp-mkp{
> border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:14px 0px;padding:0px

14px;}
> #ygrp-mkp hr{
> border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}
> #ygrp-mkp #hd{
>
color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:bold;line-height:122%;margin:10p
x 0px;}

> #ygrp-mkp #ads{
> margin-bottom:10px;}
> #ygrp-mkp .ad{
> padding:0 0;}
> #ygrp-mkp .ad a{
> color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}
> -->
>
>
>
> <!--
>
> #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc{
> font-family:Arial;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc #hd{
> margin:10px 0px;font-weight:bold;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc .ad{
> margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}
> -->
>
>
>
> <!--
>
> #ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial, helvetica, clean,

sans-serif;}
> #ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
> #ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial, helvetica, clean,
sans-serif;}

> #ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}
> #ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}
> #ygrp-text{
> font-family:Georgia;
> }
> #ygrp-text p{
> margin:0 0 1em 0;}
> #ygrp-tpmsgs{
> font-family:Arial;
> clear:both;}
> #ygrp-vitnav{
> padding-top:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;margin:0;}
> #ygrp-vitnav a{
> padding:0 1px;}
> #ygrp-actbar{
> clear:both;margin:25px

0;white-space:nowrap;color:#666;text-align:right;}

> #ygrp-actbar .left{
> float:left;white-space:nowrap;}
> .bld{font-weight:bold;}
> #ygrp-grft{
> font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;padding:15px 0;}
> #ygrp-ft{
> font-family:verdana;font-size:77%;border-top:1px solid #666;
> padding:5px 0;
> }
> #ygrp-mlmsg #logo{
> padding-bottom:10px;}
>
> #ygrp-vital{
> background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:2px 0 8px 8px;}
> #ygrp-vital #vithd{
> font-size:77%;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:bold;color:#333;text-

transform:uppercase;}
> #ygrp-vital ul{
> padding:0;margin:2px 0;}
> #ygrp-vital ul li{
> list-style-type:none;clear:both;border:1px solid #e0ecee;
> }
> #ygrp-vital ul li .ct{
>
font-weight:bold;color:#ff7900;float:right;width:2em;text-align:right;pa
dding-
right:.5em;}

> #ygrp-vital ul li .cat{
> font-weight:bold;}
> #ygrp-vital a{
> text-decoration:none;}
>
> #ygrp-vital a:hover{
> text-decoration:underline;}
>
> #ygrp-sponsor #hd{
> color:#999;font-size:77%;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ov{
> padding:6px 13px;background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{
> padding:0 0 0 8px;margin:0;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ov li{
> list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;font-size:77%;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{
> text-decoration:none;font-size:130%;}
> #ygrp-sponsor #nc{
> background-color:#eee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:0 8px;}
> #ygrp-sponsor .ad{
> padding:8px 0;}
> #ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{
>

font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold;color:#628c2a;font-size:100%;line-hei
ght:122%;}

> #ygrp-sponsor .ad a{
> text-decoration:none;}
> #ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{
> text-decoration:underline;}
> #ygrp-sponsor .ad p{
> margin:0;}
> o{font-size:0;}
> .MsoNormal{
> margin:0 0 0 0;}
> #ygrp-text tt{
> font-size:120%;}
> blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}
> .replbq{margin:4;}
> -->
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[telarson]

Henrik Nyh <> wrote:

> That's not quite true.
>
> Say A should be tagged: incident response, xx And B: blah incident,
> bleh response
>
> then if you just space-separate everything, searching for
> "incident+response" will find another kind of response (B with its
> "bleh response") and another kind of incident ("blah incident").  
>
> That said, I'd follow the del.icio.us convention and use
> "incidentresponse" etc. To me the current system is Good Enough.

Using tag+tag on Del is an intersection, not a union.  (Adding tags
refines the search to a smaller result set.)  It does what I described
earlier, not what you describe here.


Tim
--
Tim Larson        AMT2 Unix Systems Administrator
    InterCall, a division of West Corporation

               Eschew obfuscation!

[Henrik Nyh]

On 2/28/08, Larson, Timothy E. <telarson@...> wrote:
> Henrik Nyh <> wrote:
>  > That's not quite true.
>  >
>  > Say A should be tagged: incident response, xx And B: blah incident,
>  > bleh response
>  >
>  > then if you just space-separate everything, searching for
>  > "incident+response" will find another kind of response (B with its
>  > "bleh response") and another kind of incident ("blah incident").

>  Using tag+tag on Del is an intersection, not a union.  (Adding tags
>  refines the search to a smaller result set.)  It does what I described
>  earlier, not what you describe here.

It is indeed an intersection. What I was trying to say is that if A
has "incident response xx" and B has "blah incident bleh response",
not just A but also B has the intersection of the tags
incident+response.

[telarson]

Henrik Nyh <> wrote:
> On 2/28/08, Larson, Timothy E. <telarson@...
>> Using tag+tag on Del is an intersection, not a union. (Adding tags
>> refines the search to a smaller result set.) It does what I described
>> earlier, not what you describe here.
>
> It is indeed an intersection. What I was trying to say is that if A
> has "incident response xx" and B has "blah incident bleh response",
> not just A but also B has the intersection of the tags  
> incident+response.

This problem remains even if you allow multi-word tags.  For example,
searching for "'incident response'" will still find things tagged
"'incident response' bleh".  The only way to get what you want is to tag
them "incident response" and ONLY "incident response" (or a variant like
"incident_response" if you choose) - no other tags allowed.  This issue
really doesn't seem to be about single-word vs multi-word tags at all.



Tim
--
Tim Larson        AMT2 Unix Systems Administrator
    InterCall, a division of West Corporation

               Eschew obfuscation!

[Henrik Nyh]

On 2/28/08, Larson, Timothy E. <telarson@...> wrote:

> Henrik Nyh <> wrote:
>  > It is indeed an intersection. What I was trying to say is that if A
>  > has "incident response xx" and B has "blah incident bleh response",
>  > not just A but also B has the intersection of the tags
>  > incident+response.
>
>  This problem remains even if you allow multi-word tags.  For example,
>  searching for "'incident response'" will still find things tagged
>  "'incident response' bleh".  The only way to get what you want is to tag
>  them "incident response" and ONLY "incident response" (or a variant like
>  "incident_response" if you choose) - no other tags allowed.  This issue
>  really doesn't seem to be about single-word vs multi-word tags at all.

It seems like we're now talking about different things. I opposed the
claim that tagging things "incident response" as two tags would give
you the same expressiveness as if Delicious added support for
multi-word tags. It doesn't, for reasons already given.

The mail I'm replying to now seems to make an orthogonal claim: that
multi-word tags doesn't change the fact that you can't search for
things with only one specific tag and no others. This is true, but
completely unrelated to my point.