[TagCommons-WG] Use Cases for Sharing Tag Data

[Thomas Vander Wal]

On 2/21/07 4:01 AM, "Nitin Borwankar" <nitin at borwankar.com> wrote:

> Thomas Vander Wal wrote:
> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> - Since the site currently only searches simple terms it is really apparent
>> that tag combinations are extremely valuable as is having a common object
>> being tagged for disambiguation of tag terms.
>> 
>> I went into the project thinking there were three valuable legs to tagging
>> (identity, object being tagged, and each tag), but found that the tagging
>> venue is also important to capture when working to share tags and
>> disambiguate terms.
>> 
>>  
>> 
> 
> Hi Thomas, Tom, others,
> 
> Thomas, you mention above a couple of concepts that are actually related.
> Both the "tagging venue" and  "tag bundle" (tag collection) indicate a
> single thing viz. context.
> Tag bundles define a context in which to understand each tag better.
> (Also, but unrelated, I like to see tag bundles as initial filtering
> mechanisms to narrow down a set of documents over which keyword search
> may be effectively used.)

There are many things that help add meaning and help to disambiguate a tag
term.  The simple folksonomy triad (one element that separates folksonomy
from general tagging) is quite helpful as a foundation with the object being
tagged, the single tag on the object, and the identity of tagger.  This is
the framework for pivoting and adding or substituting one of the three
elements while keeping the other two constant.

1) The object being tagged and the identity can help build the tag
combinations used (combinations seems to be the common term for the multiple
tag terms applied) to better understand a single tag term.

2) A tag and the identity can be used to find other objects and the
relationship between the tag and the object is the definition (by use). But
the definition is not fully clear. Use of the tag by the identity on other
objects helps better understand the use/definition.

3) Lastly, the single tag and object combination can be used to find other
identities that *potentially* use the term in a similar manner.  Running a
quick probability algorithm with a second identity using the term on the
same set of objects as the first identity, it takes anywhere from 6 to 10
common objects to get a strong probability that the term use is the same
(not stating identical).

> I'd like to suggest something radical, that a single tag by itself is
> meaningless but is imbued with meaning by
> the other tags with which it is used.  Or to be more precise - single
> tags have potentially ambiguous meaning which is disambiguated by the
> other tags it is used with.

I would be careful with this statement as it is from an external view to the
person who placed the tag.  The tag to each person that places it has
immense meaning, far deeper and broader than can be discerned by others.
But, looking at things from outside that person whom placed that tag term we
are void of that meaning.  I would agree with a statement along the lines
of, "consuming tags placed by others, the single tag would seem meaningless,
but is imbued with meaning by other tags and/or other uses of that tag term
by the same identity".
 
> This relates to Wittgenstein's thinking that a meaning of a word is not
> absolute but lies in its use.
> In the subject area of tagging I interpret that to mean that a tag by
> itself has little or no meaning but tag bundles
> are far more useful entities for consideration.  A corollary of this is
> that "tagging venue" or site is a very large tag bundle defining a large
> semantic domain.

Ah, but a tag term is used by an identity and is tethered to an object and
that has meaning.  A tag removed from the identity and from the object has
little or no meaning.  The tagclouds that populate the homepages of a site
have little meaning in the single tags. The tag with an object as part of a
tagcloud has some meaning.  The tagcloud for a person has some meaning.

Tag term combinations on an object by an identity have meaning. Tag
combinations have a weaker bond across identities, which means finding tag
combinations in common across identities seems to be less common that a
single tag used with the same definition by more than one identity across
items they have tagged in common.

There is a threshold for systems/venue (and with in the systems/venues they
scale at vastly different rates) where the it moves from a personal tagging
service to a collective tagging service.  There is no collective tagging,
but going through personal tagging. There is meaning to the person for the
tags they place, but external to that person there is great need for
disambiguation, which comes through scale.

All the best,
Thomas

-- 
Work: www.infocloudsolutions.com
Work blog: www.personalinfocloud.com
Personal: www.vanderwal.net

Mobile/Work: +1 703.298.3344
Skype: tjvanderwal
AIM: vanderwal
YahooIM: tjvanderwal