Great inclusion of tags -
can we have 5 tags per post instead of
5 vs 2 tags per thread ?

and is it possible for us to make suggestions for tag simplification -?-
we have

spell and
spelling

already - and I need to tidy these up
- or my head will fall off -

- (the suggestion would be 'synonyms') - where 'spelling' is listed on site as a synonym of 'spell' -

- and at some point
- might it be possible to structure the tags into a DAG-like parent-child structure (if we choose) -

- so... as the tree develops - the individual defining tags gets to define (if they want) - the location of the tag within the tree -
more specifically the tag's position with parent and child relationships (or neither if that's what they'd prefer) - anchoring the specific ideas which they've put forward.

... for instance tag Nietzsche - could be placed under evolution (its parent) - at least in my latest addition of the tags 'evolution' and 'Nietzsche' - here (yesterday).

And I'd put 'DAG' under 'structure' - from this thread starter.

SB tags man this gets better all the time and just when I thought I knew what I was doing - oh well can't be too confident these days.

Great inclusion of tags -
can we have 5 tags per post instead of
5 vs 2 tags per thread ?

I was able to add tags to this thread - although I admit tags are new to me it seems to be some type of search function - now word use consistency hmmmm the uniqueness of some members verbiage may make this function even more useful when looking for their previous post connected to same topic in current discussion.




where 'spelling' is listed on site as a synonym of 'spell'

Hmmm I am guess I took for gandit that every one would associate similar words as same meaning but I guess due to different native languages of our members this could become a problem in the future -In all honesty I hadn't thought of that.





might it be possible to structure the tags into a DAG-like parent-child structure (if we choose) -

Like a setting an individual member can activate to have the tags appear in a tree form or an outline format?



I think the idea is a "tag cloud"

clicking on the tags finds all threads that have the same tag this cloud will also give members a quick way to see what has been searched most recently and most frequently by listing the most common and changing the text size for the most frequent - err or maybe it is the other way around . . . this tag thing is kind of new to me.

poop what this guy (http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1450765&postcount=3) says


As you can tell some staff {namely me} are still muddling -

heya Tams :-)

... just failed to find my attempt to do this previously - down in one of the 'creative' sections on site -
- just a case of putting obvious synonyms together (ones which don't even requre reading of posts) - like
'spell' and 'spelling' -

- but then the rearrangement of the tags into an order - so that a story may be defined - a kinda network - where the connections between tags may be delivered as a story.

Actually
- thinking about it some more - I was assuming that tag clouds (don't really know what their intended usage is) - were lists of keywords which grow in font size as they're more and more heavily used -
- however - is there any way of having (as you suggest) - a cloud of tags which have a distance from other tags - such that tags which're close in space
- are related

- by that I mean that 'evolution' might lie close to 'genetics' (in the image) -
and distant from
- 'cortex' itself close to 'pyramidal' -

- with the distance reflected by the number of times that the two words were together (preferably on post level)
- but at the thread works also -
- though I suspect less well (here) - of all places :-)
- where threads tend to cover much ground - relative to posts - which often (though not always) - maintain only a small handful of different sub-threads.

I think that's why I was asking if we can have the optional possibility of 5 or so post level keywords
- as opposed to (at worst) - 2 at the thread level.

Some of our monster threads require more than 2 words for annotation.

Just a suggestion - but one (I think) which'd make any associations between ideas - much more obvious
- because more data (5 potential connections per post) - could be made -
- as opposed to how it is currently.

On top of that - with a little more data - tags which were more closely associated - could appear in a drop down - when selecting keywords - making it more likely that current keywords'd be used - as opposed to synonyms - and that only new words - when new words are necessary - would be used.

Here's the sort of thing I think I mean

from
www visualcomplexity . com
(I have used the technology on www liveplasma com)

eg -> here (http://www.visualcomplexity.com/vc/project_details.cfm?index=123&id=123&domain=)

where people enter their favourite bands - and the information is translated to provide those maps.

these kinda' images are possible
http://a.parsons.edu/~lima/visualcomplexity/images/123_big02.jpg


and instead of feeding Jane's addiction with red hot chilli peppers -

- we'd end up with
(pyramidal) -> (cortices)
-
|
|
shifted away from
|
|
-
evolutionary -> genetics

The point - I think I'm trying to get at -
is that despite the hundreds of thousands of posts here -
that all of the ideas - might be simplified down into a simple model for ADD - which would gain its weight from being a model developed by the people - each contributing their insight - no bias - and being - ultimately - the best piece of work on the disorder - considering the numbers of people contributing - all without preconception on the final 'systems' level model which might be delivered.