Slashdot Mirror
Labels Not Tags, Says Google
Ashraf Al Shafaki writes "The word 'tags' is the one in common use on the Web today and is one of the distinctive features of Web 2.0. Ever since Gmail came out, Google has decided to use the term 'label' instead of the term 'tag' despite they are basically the exact same thing and have the exact same function. Why is Google using inconsistent terminology in its products for such an important term? Is there a real difference between a tag and a label?"
I think they do so intending it to be a replacement of an obsolete term "folder" or "directory". I myself was also fed up with directories on my PC. I hope in the future there will be no such thing as directories in the filesystem at all, and there will be labels instead.
LABELLING beta!
Get it Right, Dammit!
It makes more sense to call them "labels" because the word "tag" generally refers to html/xml tags. Since you can use these tags (although you don't have to) to create the label type of tags, it's especially confusing.
In any case, it's closer to plain English to call them labels. That's what you're doing. If I'm in GMail and I want to indicate that an email is work related it is closer to plain English to say that I labelled it work than to say that I tagged it work.
Is this what a slow news day really looks like?
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
Eudora and Thunderbird use the term labels. MS Entourage and MS Outlook use the term categories. By the way, is there some standards document like RFC saying any web app, especially webmail, has to use the term tags?
'Tagging' is when you put a mark on someone else's property... Hence maybe tagging is what other people do to your content (as here on slashdot) whereas labelling is what you do to your gmail messages... uh, maybe.
Maybe google just think tagging sounds like graffiti-talk...
That's it I'm off. You've driven me out of the house into the pissing rain where I'm going to get soaking wet... I hope you're happy with yourselves. I'll have to mingle with... "people"... I may catch something, if I do, I'll blame you.
Deleted
"Tagging" is often used to refer to graffiti, as well as the more positive meanings. Label almost always refers to the concept of "Something carrying identifying information". So, I think that "label" is clearer. Also, I wish everywhere would stick to comma separation, as this more closely fits with how lists are usually written, but that's another story (that was posted the other day).
I'm scared of numbers that can't be written as a fraction. It's an irrational fear.
This kind of discussion obscures the real point: that tags (or labels) are only as good as the userbase that creates them. For example, the OS X Vs. Vista story a little while ago - the tags were "yes", "no", "FUD" etc., which are worthless when you come to sort stories out (seriously, what kind of person uses "yes" as a search term?).
Must ... fight ... Google monopoly....
a g
http://search.live.com/results.aspx?q=define%3A+t
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
Why is Google using inconsistent terminology in its products for such an important term?
Important term?
Puh-lease.
You have a bunch of websites, many of which call themselves the buzzword-2.0 of the week, that have implemented a feature that has zero standardization or between-site meaning. Most of these sites actually allow users to post comments, making one-word comments completely pointless. Though someone will probably point me to a counterexample, I have yet to see a site that lets you meaningfully search or filter by tags.
On that point, note the key word, "meaningfully". Check out Amazon's tags for the best I've seen yet, and it still sucks so hard that you have a dozen words all describing (almost) the same thing - "Almost", except that you'd have to check every single one of them to find the 1% that they don't overlap. Example: "green", "environment", "environmental", "conservation", "sustainability", and a handful of similar words all mean the same thing, yet point to slightly different lists; And on those lists, do you find environmentally-friendly products? No. You find nothing but books of pseudoscience written by and for zealots.
I'll worry about what to call these things if (not "when") they actually take on some usefulness. Until then, you can call them "snergs" for all I care.
The 'label' is where the size and washing instructions are.
The 'tag' is where the price is.
I have made extensive use of the 'label' feature in gmail like I am sure many others here have too and I have found it very handy. Another aspect of my computing life that I found DESPERATELY needed labels was my music collection.
I have always organized my music in Genre - Artist - Album - song format, but I have found that too many songs would be multi-genre.
(ie. most modern Top40 songs today are also Rap/Dance/Hip-Hop)
So as a result my collection became mass-sorted into one of four major directories:
Rock/Alternative
Pop/Top 40/Rap/Hip Hop/Dance/Techno
Blues/R & B
Other
The ability to 'quickly find' a desired song became impossible.
Along came iTunes and it was awesome, but lacking.
Along came Amarok and it was better, but lacking.
Now Amarok has added a new feature called Labels, and I am in love (but it is still lacking).
Now I can ignore the Genre headache, and just use labels to identify what Genres of music that apply to the song.
This works only as long as I use Amarok for my music player. I am still SOL if i want to just browse the filesystem and grab a couple of songs on the spur of the moment.
What we need is a file system label structure that can/will apply to all files that we use.
Where to store Aunt Betty's cookie recipe? ~/docs/recipes ~/docs/aunt betty/ ~/docs/cookies
A bad solution is to create sym-links everywhere. A better solution would be to have labels appear as virtual directories.
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
...can be an invaluable search term.
Just because those in the web 2.0 world are using a word doesn't mean it's the right word for the mainstream.