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.
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.
started by John Maklary on 30 Mar 08
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.
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.