Post History
I was surprised with joy when I saw that Codidact allows tag hierarchies: A tag can have one or more children, and when you search on a tag you can either search just that tag or also search its...
#2: Post edited
by
fedorqui
·
2020-11-16T14:03:27Z (almost 4 years ago)
remove usage of categories to avoid confusion with Codidact's categories
- I was surprised with joy when I saw that [Codidact allows tag hierarchies](https://meta.codidact.com/questions/276452):
- >A tag can have one or more children, and when you search on a tag you can either search just that tag or also search its children. This gives communities another way to organize content.
This is extremely useful to properly categorize items: it is common in other communities that people tag with the specific subcategory, but then forget to add the general scope tag.So what is the proposed ontology for the Languages & Linguistics site? I foresee a category for each language and then, eventually, subcategories for the rest.But should we have general tags like [grammar](https://languages.codidact.com/categories/36/tags/3310), [pronunciation](https://languages.codidact.com/categories/36/tags/3343) and so on? Should others like [number](https://languages.codidact.com/categories/36/tags/3800) be part of a bigger category, so we just have more general categories?
- I was surprised with joy when I saw that [Codidact allows tag hierarchies](https://meta.codidact.com/questions/276452):
- >A tag can have one or more children, and when you search on a tag you can either search just that tag or also search its children. This gives communities another way to organize content.
- This is extremely useful to properly categorize items: it is common in other communities that people tag with the specific concept, but then forget to add the general scope tag.
- So what is the proposed ontology for the Languages & Linguistics site? I foresee a general set of tags for each language and then, eventually, specific tags for the rest.
- But should we have general tags like [grammar](https://languages.codidact.com/categories/36/tags/3310), [pronunciation](https://languages.codidact.com/categories/36/tags/3343) and so on? Should others like [number](https://languages.codidact.com/categories/36/tags/3800) be part of a bigger category, so we just have more general tags on the top level?
#1: Initial revision
by
fedorqui
·
2020-11-02T10:28:16Z (about 4 years ago)
What tag hierarchy and ontology should Linguistics use?
I was surprised with joy when I saw that [Codidact allows tag hierarchies](https://meta.codidact.com/questions/276452): >A tag can have one or more children, and when you search on a tag you can either search just that tag or also search its children. This gives communities another way to organize content. This is extremely useful to properly categorize items: it is common in other communities that people tag with the specific subcategory, but then forget to add the general scope tag. So what is the proposed ontology for the Languages & Linguistics site? I foresee a category for each language and then, eventually, subcategories for the rest. But should we have general tags like [grammar](https://languages.codidact.com/categories/36/tags/3310), [pronunciation](https://languages.codidact.com/categories/36/tags/3343) and so on? Should others like [number](https://languages.codidact.com/categories/36/tags/3800) be part of a bigger category, so we just have more general categories?