I like the idea of a shared group. Should we consider some tagging standards to help with organization? Already there are a LOT of tags and I've been finding that too many tags make important links get buried quickly. Should groups be more topic specific? I guess we're all trying to get comfortable with diigo.
Group,
I just posted the below in several forums. Thoughts are appreciated.
Standardized Tagging
So I'd like to call for a virtual meeting to discuss tagging structures. I've had a chance to look at the tagging dictionary and the community tags work well, but my thoughts are on a system that goes one step further.
Example: if you tag podcasting, you really are covering a lot of group. Is the site a how to, best practice or general example? What can happen quickly is that you get a list of 50+ podcasting links and you've got to sort through them to find specific content. I was Skyping Michelle Krill earlier and we brainstormed a few ideas.
Think of file formating. Excel = .xls Word = .doc Flash = .swf, etc...
If we chose (Michelle's term) add-ons, we could go a long way to better organizing our resources. Example: If you find a site that is a best practice for wikis, you wouldn't tag it wikis, you would tag it wikis_bp. If you find another wiki site that shows how tos, wikis_ht. This would allow for your tags to stay together, but better sort the resources. We could start with the development of standardized tagging add-ons. Think of this as an IEEE approach to education. Who is interested in meeting to discuss?
MB
John Maklary wrote:
> I like the idea of a shared group. Should we consider some tagging standards to help with organization? Already there are a LOT of tags and I've been finding that too many tags make important links get buried quickly. Should groups be more topic specific? I guess we're all trying to get comfortable with diigo.
I'm hosting a virtual conversation to discuss standardized tagging at the below link. The meeting will run today from 1-2 pm EST.
http://208.185.34.51/launcher.cgi?room=southside
You need to leave the Room ID as southside and please enter both your first and last name in the name field. This can take a few minutes to load if you haven't used Wimba in the past. Feel free to invite anybody interested in the topic.
MB
Michael Baker wrote:
> Group,
>
> I just posted the below in several forums. Thoughts are appreciated.
>
> Standardized Tagging
> So I'd like to call for a virtual meeting to discuss tagging structures. I've had a chance to look at the tagging dictionary and the community tags work well, but my thoughts are on a system that goes one step further.
>
> Example: if you tag podcasting, you really are covering a lot of group. Is the site a how to, best practice or general example? What can happen quickly is that you get a list of 50+ podcasting links and you've got to sort through them to find specific content. I was Skyping Michelle Krill earlier and we brainstormed a few ideas.
>
> Think of file formating. Excel = .xls Word = .doc Flash = .swf, etc...
> If we chose (Michelle's term) add-ons, we could go a long way to better organizing our resources. Example: If you find a site that is a best practice for wikis, you wouldn't tag it wikis, you would tag it wikis_bp. If you find another wiki site that shows how tos, wikis_ht. This would allow for your tags to stay together, but better sort the resources. We could start with the development of standardized tagging add-ons. Think of this as an IEEE approach to education. Who is interested in meeting to discuss?
>
> MB
>
> John Maklary wrote:
> > I like the idea of a shared group. Should we consider some tagging standards to help with organization? Already there are a LOT of tags and I've been finding that too many tags make important links get buried quickly. Should groups be more topic specific? I guess we're all trying to get comfortable with diigo.
Just remember that we only 16 tags -- that is NOT a lot!
Also -- looking at it by NOUN is important. Who is a person -- I"m an administrator so I'd be interested in this. I found that structure really helped me in delicious.
Finally -- we need to leave room for folksonomy still -- and should understand which tags are for what -- people aren't yet selecting from the tag dictionary we're using so we're not getting the benefit of the true aggregation that we can have.
Vicki
Michael Baker wrote:
> I'm hosting a virtual conversation to discuss standardized tagging at the below link. The meeting will run today from 1-2 pm EST.
>
> http://208.185.34.51/launcher.cgi?room=southside
>
> You need to leave the Room ID as southside and please enter both your first and last name in the name field. This can take a few minutes to load if you haven't used Wimba in the past. Feel free to invite anybody interested in the topic.
>
> MB
>
> Michael Baker wrote:
> > Group,
> >
> > I just posted the below in several forums. Thoughts are appreciated.
> >
> > Standardized Tagging
> > So I'd like to call for a virtual meeting to discuss tagging structures. I've had a chance to look at the tagging dictionary and the community tags work well, but my thoughts are on a system that goes one step further.
> >
> > Example: if you tag podcasting, you really are covering a lot of group. Is the site a how to, best practice or general example? What can happen quickly is that you get a list of 50+ podcasting links and you've got to sort through them to find specific content. I was Skyping Michelle Krill earlier and we brainstormed a few ideas.
> >
> > Think of file formating. Excel = .xls Word = .doc Flash = .swf, etc...
> > If we chose (Michelle's term) add-ons, we could go a long way to better organizing our resources. Example: If you find a site that is a best practice for wikis, you wouldn't tag it wikis, you would tag it wikis_bp. If you find another wiki site that shows how tos, wikis_ht. This would allow for your tags to stay together, but better sort the resources. We could start with the development of standardized tagging add-ons. Think of this as an IEEE approach to education. Who is interested in meeting to discuss?
> >
> > MB
> >
> > John Maklary wrote:
> > > I like the idea of a shared group. Should we consider some tagging standards to help with organization? Already there are a LOT of tags and I've been finding that too many tags make important links get buried quickly. Should groups be more topic specific? I guess we're all trying to get comfortable with diigo.
Michael Baker
John Maklary
Vicki Davis