User Comments

Categories are nice, well… until you happen to have write entries that don’t fit any category… so then you create new categories, but after a while of this, you realize you have more categories than you can handle, and you implement subcategories. Then what? Labels? Keywords? Do you get one of those dedicated Google blades? 8^)

Listen to me! Categories are a gateway drug! Soon you’ll be installing Movable Type and asking people to “ping” your special “linkies” category! (real feature)

So kinds, say NO to categories and stay in school. If you have to choose between the two, never mind school. 8^)

Soon you’ll be installing Movable Type

No I won’t, ever!

say NO to categories

The success of del.icio.us and flickr justifies categories (tagging) far more convincingly than I could.

With the pending re-launch I’m dropping date-based urls altogether in favor of category based urls. For me it just makes sense WRT IA.

Nice addition!

Thanks Mike.

After reading some of your newer posts with the categories applied to them I can’t help but feel like the metaphor you are using is a little mixed.

I can understand the idea of “filing a post” under a category, but surly you cannot “file” something under multiple categories?

In this case, are we not dealing with “keywords” instead?

In this case, are we not dealing with “keywords” instead?

Isn’t it just a name Noah? You could call them anything, surely?

Categories, labels, tags, keywords, groups, etc.

Which would you prefer?

Keyword is descriptive, but tags seems to be quite popular nowadays.

No I personally don’t believe that it’s just as name. When it comes to UI design and navigation names are VERY important when trying to communicate the structure and expected functionality of a system.

So would you recommend that I change “Filed Under:” to “Tags:”?

Yes I would. “Tags” is more descriptive from my own personal point of view.

‘tis done oh wise one! :-)