Lady of the Land @Lady@cat.family

apparently some albums released while i was travelling

i think prior to this trip @Satsuma may have underestimated the extent to which i can be a hopeless gay

BULLIED

SoSourur. . SwSweeeet.t. G Gonone.e.

« her name was set to be pronounced as a Chozo name, even though Samus received her name from her original human parents and the Chozo spoke a language that didn’t open words with the voiceless alveolar fricative » team i18n has logged on

@gaditb i think tag labels should be blank nodes, and not have identifiers :P

but for cuddling

orange bites u

bitten

@gaditb i think generally we are in agreement conceptually i am just coming at this from a library sciences mentality whereas you are coming at it from a social sciences mentality so we're putting emphasis in different places

i want a library system which works, you want a social infrastructure enabling a certain kind of communication, the actual solution needs to be both of these things

@gaditb that's because these are best practices that are impossible to change once you do them wrong the first time

like mastodon accounts being unable to change their username because eugen decided to put that in the URL and if it changed it would break all the links and federation generally for every existing account

i put a lot of emphasis on not doing this because it's really important that you not do this lol. you need to be able to change “transsexual” to “transgender” to “trans” in the canonical version of the tag, even if some works continue to use outdated terminology, or else you will build systems (like the library of congress subject headings) which perpetuate outdated and offensive terminology long after better language comes about

as far as localization goes, i generally agree with your takes but also pokémon have different names in english and japanese and different people pick different ones; i think that can be supported. there will be bilingual communities and multilingual communities and even (especially) understanding that the tags are translations from a different language, people might still want to read them in a language they actually understand. i think that can be supported too

@gaditb you can't have that cake and eat it too though without those communities doing the work to, you know, define that agreed-upon ontology and put it out there in a format their members can use, which is the problem space i'm trying to tackle

@gaditb i think you're assuming that ontologies are being made from people outside of the community and my point is the opposite, that in a federated context communities can express themselves directly to their audiences using the language they both have agreed on, instead of needing a third party to wrangle that language into a globally-recognized form

@gaditb oh, i think we disagree about the purpose of tagging then

i think the primary purpose of tagging is aiding discovery systems, and i think this stance is strongly evidenced by how tags are used for search and filtering on AO3. i question why “Peter Parker is a Nice Jewish Boy” is being entered into the “tags” field and not the “description” field if the purpose isn’t associating the work with other works where Peter Parker is a Nice Jewish Boy

if that association IS desired, then it’s to everyone’s benefit if that tag is suggested to authors, for example, if they have already tagged the work with “Peter Parker”, so they don’t recreate the tag with a different spelling and require wrangling work to smooth over the differences (assuming user-suggested tags are even an option)

i don’t want to foreclose the idea of tags that aren’t discovery-oriented. i think you’re right that it’s a use case. but i also feel that users might want works tagged “Peter Parker is a Nice Jewish Boy” to appear in tag listings for “Peter Parker”, “Nice Jewish Boys”, “Jewish culture”, et cetera, even if those other tags weren’t supplied… and it’s an open question whether it is a good thing or a bad thing that this can happen even when a creator is primarily in a communicative frame of mind

@gaditb ah well i think part of that is just the lack of implementations

the design goal is something that can be hosted as JSON files on Github pages. i think that's the right level of necessary technicality but has the flipside of being utterly unopinionated about how you generate those JSON files and get them in Github pages. i have my own opinions here but i don't think there SHOULD be an opinion, generally, at a schema level

i don't think there is a NECESSARY lot of work around getting a basic tagset. i think it can be really simple. (i mean, i think you can do it by hand.) but i also think that there are plenty of fannish librarians who love categorizing things and i’m really frustrated in the lack of tools they have to DO that right now, so this is growing a bit out of that frustration

i also think you might be underestimating the advantages of structured data: if you ARE working with a limited tagset of known values, it is FAR easier to find the tag you want by going “Comics > Superheroes > Marvel > Spiderman” than by trying to remember if the correct tag is “Spiderman” or “Spidey” or “Peter Parker”. fuzzy text matching offers a better experience over a structured knowledge system if you don’t know what you’re looking for, but a typically worse experience if you do, because people remember a concept’s location in a hierarchy much better than they do its exact name. in both the case of people assigning tags to works as well as that of people looking for works, i think they can generally be assumed to have familiarity with the tags they are using, so i want to design for the system which works best for them. that means emphasis on structured relationships and text labels can be thrown to the wind (which is to say, left to authors without consequence)

(this is better for internationalization too)

@gaditb more friendly discussion here: https://blog.ladys.computer/2023-05-26/federated_tagging/

@gaditb is this an intentional or unintentional rep for https://ns.1024.gdn/Tagging/