<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Mac: Organize your files with tags</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.distracto.net/2005/05/mac-organize-yo/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.distracto.net/2005/05/mac-organize-yo/</link>
	<description>Short-lived Obsessions with Interesting Things</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Jan 2011 03:55:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: marc nothrop</title>
		<link>http://www.distracto.net/2005/05/mac-organize-yo/comment-page-1/#comment-53</link>
		<dc:creator>marc nothrop</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 May 2005 14:11:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.distracto.net/?p=32#comment-53</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Hey, I have to agree with you on the &#039;buzzwordiness&#039; of the net.  ; )   Tags are just categories, labels, variables, pick a name, but they&#039;re hardly a new concept. The somewhat clumsy &#039;folksonomy&#039; is, as you say, an amateur, or community-developed ontology.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As soon as I installed Tiger I set up the same system, but haven&#039;t really been using it a great deal -- my other thought had been to use Finder labels, even though they are much more limited -- they&#039;ve been in the system a long while, and for a long time I&#039;ve hoped for an unlimited number of labels, eps. pre-OS X, when you could also assign a title to a label colour. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While this isn&#039;t the same as multiple tags per file, it would certainly be a start. I think I&#039;ll end up using a combination of Labels and Tags, for finer-grained organisation, and to stand out visually (as well as another search criterion) -- labels will just settle into their pre-OS X function as denoting status, and tags will be the real organising property.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Having said all of that, since my work Mac isn&#039;t on Tiger yet, I&#039;m really just using it on my PB, to &#039;tag&#039; things &#039;red&#039;, to review them later.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, I have to agree with you on the &#8216;buzzwordiness&#8217; of the net.  ; )   Tags are just categories, labels, variables, pick a name, but they&#8217;re hardly a new concept. The somewhat clumsy &#8216;folksonomy&#8217; is, as you say, an amateur, or community-developed ontology.</p>
<p>As soon as I installed Tiger I set up the same system, but haven&#8217;t really been using it a great deal &#8212; my other thought had been to use Finder labels, even though they are much more limited &#8212; they&#8217;ve been in the system a long while, and for a long time I&#8217;ve hoped for an unlimited number of labels, eps. pre-OS X, when you could also assign a title to a label colour. </p>
<p>While this isn&#8217;t the same as multiple tags per file, it would certainly be a start. I think I&#8217;ll end up using a combination of Labels and Tags, for finer-grained organisation, and to stand out visually (as well as another search criterion) &#8212; labels will just settle into their pre-OS X function as denoting status, and tags will be the real organising property.</p>
<p>Having said all of that, since my work Mac isn&#8217;t on Tiger yet, I&#8217;m really just using it on my PB, to &#8216;tag&#8217; things &#8216;red&#8217;, to review them later.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

