8 Replies Latest reply on Mar 24, 2009 10:14 PM by Ryan Rutan

    What do we want?  Tag Group / Space Parity !!

    rboutin

      I agree conceptually with all of the dialog regarding the use (and value) of using tags and tag groups over sub-spaces when it comes to organizing content. What I need in order to make it practically viable is functional equality from a user's perspective. That is, my users must be able to reach tag group content as fast as sub-space content (# of clicks), and they must be able to set the same level of notifications (RSS/Watch) as is available in a space. Until this is true my users will not tolerate or embrace tagging as an organizational method (vs using tagging for improved search results).

       

      Until there is parity the promise of tagging will not be realized (at least where I live)...

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

       

      Please help!

       

       

      (of course we also want improved wiki syntax...)

       

      Message was edited by: rboutin (added shameless plug for enhanced wiki syntax)

        • Re: What do we want?  Tag Group / Space Parity !!
          Magpie

           

          I agree - Tag Groups offer a lot of flexibility that a strict hierarchy can't, but, as stated, adoption is going to be affected by a lack of functional parity with sub-spaces.

           

           

          Clearspace is at a cusp of implementing a new paradigm for organizing content, indeed one that does nor appear to fight the current architecture to achieve roll-ups. Win-Win?

           

           

           

           

           

          • Re: What do we want?  Tag Group / Space Parity !!

            Wow! I love this community!!! Apologies for the lack of participation this week... Magpie, I still owe you a response to your great post about Clearspace and Clearspace X bridging.

             

            Regarding tag groups and spaces and how they play together, it is a very active topic of conversation at Jive and something we wrestle with all the time. We're kicking off a formal project to work through the options and see what we can come up with and all the feedback coming from the community and other customers is driving those options.

             

            This is one of those things that people have strong opinions about, and there are many (sometimes competing) ideas floating around. My hope (and sense) is that with some serious focus on the problem we'll come up with a way to satisfy many of the current concerns.

             

            Keep the thoughts and ideas coming... as soon as we have some firm proposals for changes we'll post about them here and refine them together. Collaboration at its best!

              • Re: What do we want?  Tag Group / Space Parity !!
                rboutin

                 

                Greg, any progress you can share on this topic?

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                thanks,

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                -randy

                 

                 

                • Re: What do we want?  Tag Group / Space Parity !!

                  I agree tag groups need to be functionally equivalent to sub-spaces in several respects.  In particular, I want the ability to nest tag groups.  The tag group construct brings the concept of tags to hierarchy as the space construct brings the concept of containers to hierarchy.  Theoretically, this enables users to organize their content hierarchically within a space using just tags, thus eliminating the limitations inherent to containers (such as folders).  However, tag groups are not multi-level today.  If I could nest tag groups, I could create the appearance of multiple levels of content organized hierarchically within a space, which would more closely mimic the traditional folder model and allow users to navigate using traditional methods.  It is important to understand that tags compliment traditional forms of hierarchy, and to some extent they lessen the need for hierarchy, but tags do not completely eliminate the need for or benefits of hierarchy.   As a space admin or content contributor within a space, I sometimes want a degree of structure.  More importantly, as a user trying to find content, sometimes I want structure so I can find things I don't know I should look for (i.e., I don't know what I don't know).  Topical content hierarchy allows me to navigate in "discovery" mode.  Of course, when I know what to look for, I want an easy way to search across all "levels" of content in all spaces, and this is where tags come into play as a replacement for hierarchy.

                   

                  An example of this is the somewhat competitive product Confluence from Atlassian.  It allows me to define filters that aggregate tags (AND operator versus OR operator), and then I can list the filters on a web page in a hierarchical manner.  The appearance of navigable hierarchy results despite the fact that all articles reside in a single container.  Jive tag groups employ an OR operator.  All content that has any one of the tags in the tag group will appear in the tag group results.  Thus, I cannot increase granularity by adding tags.  Confluence supports both AND and OR operators in their filters.

                   

                  I read the Jive ClearSpace 2.5 documentation, but frankly there is scant useful information there on the topic of tag groups (e.g., syntax, operators, etc.).

                    • Re: What do we want?  Tag Group / Space Parity !!
                      Ted Hopton

                      The last post in here could have been written by one of my power users -- in fact, I had to come check this out to see if she did write it! It's exactly what she's been saying.

                       

                      Add a +3 at least from us to these points.

                      • Re: What do we want?  Tag Group / Space Parity !!
                        Ryan Rutan

                        +1 on this as well.  To reiterate a thought from another thread I've discussed this with, the ability to concatenate Tag Group(s) (OR) with compound Tags (AND) would be really nice.  I admit that it would be pretty nasty to implement, but something to help the natural transition from selecting a Tag Group, and then wanting to filter the content results again...keeping the previous filter.

                         

                        This concept/problem can also be seen by "My Stuff" browsing.  If I click on My Stuff, and then click on a commonly used tag from "My Stuff" ...I see everyone's stuff for that Tag.  I'd like the fact that I already put a filter in place to remain intact.

                         

                        Perhaps this is the nested Tag Group idea that recommended above, but overall..I agree Tag Groups are very awesome...but need to bring them to the forefront a bit more with some more usability analysis in regards to their use with other filtration mechanisms.