Anyone interested in tree labels?

[chaoliu719]

I just moved from Flomo, and there are some nice features that don't seem to be there, and I wonder if you need them.

Current system:

• tags are stored as arrays of JSON strings in payload
• tags are simple strings with no hierarchy
• tags and memos are tightly coupled

Tag Tree System:

1. Support for hierarchical tags (such as work/Project1, work/Project2)
2. Tags can have independent metadata (description, color, emoji, etc.)
3. Better label management and organization
4. Support tag renaming, merging and other operations
5. You can create relationships between tags.
6. Better performance (through indexing)

Migration Ideas:

• tags just refer to tag nodes
• tag nodes are stored in a tree structure (supporting a hierarchical system)
• tags and notes are stored separately
• notes are indexed by tags
• notes are used to update tag reference counts, backlinks, etc.

Difficulties:

1. Old Data Migration Mode
2. The API may change

[nick16180]

I started using something like "category:" and "tag:" with some internal rules that goven how I use them. Categories are larger projects/topics that I care about and tags have more to do with content.

[chaoliu719]

That's a great point about differentiating tags and categories. We can use tags to describe the specific characteristics of a memo, and categories to sort it into a general theme or topic. Did I get that right?

[nick16180]

For me, categories are broad, like sections in a library, and tags are much more specific. It works for me.

[chaoliu719]

@nick16180, your comment made me rethink this. I now believe the core issue is not the lack of a tree structure for tags, but the absence of a clear classification system. If we had a good classification system, people would stop creating nested tags like #work/project/A. Tags could then be used purely for their intended function: connecting different memos through multi-dimensional queries.

[nick16180]

I agree with you. Tags are fine but a classification system does not really exist. The idea of folders kind of works but then breaks down when a memo falls into two "folder" topics. I chose my category system for that reason, but I may alter them later. I have tested a bunch of these systems and seen others. Tags are very common and others have literal folders or projects that things fall into. I rather like the loose idea of tags specifically because there is not always a clear cut way to label things. Anywah, some more customization options would be helpful too.

[chaoliu719]

Maybe we can reconsider my initial idea of using tags to classify everything. This method gets rid of the single-folder problem. You can give a note multiple tags, so you'll never have to worry about a memo needing to be in two places at once. Just add all the relevant tags.

Plus, it offers a ton of customization, which is exactly what you were looking for when you mentioned needing "more customization options." You're free to organize the tags however you want, without being stuck in a rigid folder or project structure forced on you by the system.

[nick16180]

I think your idea is great!

[chaoliu719]

I abandoned this plan because I believe the existing tagging system is already perfect enough and does not need to be modified to expand other functions. As for the category, I think it is necessary, but I will not implement it at the moment.