[Debtags-devel] New version of Debtags stuff uploaded to experimental

[Erich Schubert]

Hi,

> Now, the point of facets is not to hierarchise, but to give a specific
> and well-defined domain to categories.  There is no hierarchy here.  I
> don't want hierarchies.

There is nothing wrong with "subdomains" per se. (think of a facet
vehicles and a subfacet wheeled-vehicles, which then has the tags car,
chariot, bicycle), and still this enforces probably too much onto the
user to artificially *separate* things. Top-level facets should be a
lot easier cut IMHO. A good set of top-level facets would probably be
"use-for, technology, looks, language, maturity".
And since these get just way to big to handle, we need additional
strcuture in there - like hwtech, swtech, implemented-in.

I mean, it was I who introduced "namespaces" into debtags, by just
naming lots of tages something::foo when I thought they kind of belong
together.

I definitely agree with the goal of having them with a clearly defined
scope, and I really want to have the entries inside as "mutually
exclusive" (in meaning, not in application) as possible.

I just don't think that limiting yourself to a one-level hierarchy
(even when you can't tag package just with a facet) will do you any
good, because you lose the clean separation at the top level then.

And for the cd-sculpture example - well, I don't use facets for the
user interface right now (which you consider to be a bug, not a
feature, and I partially agree).

best regards,
Erich Schubert
--
    erich@(mucl.de|debian.org)      --      GPG Key ID: 4B3A135C    (o_
  To understand recursion you first need to understand recursion.   //\
  Wo befreundete Wege zusammenlaufen, da sieht die ganze Welt f=FCr   V_/_
        eine Stunde wie eine Heimat aus. --- Herrmann Hesse