Re: tags for functions

[Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>]

On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 03:07:23 -0500 MON KEY <monkey@sandpframing.com> wrote: 

>> 2) refine the keywords into a simple taxonomy that is not too big nor too small.
>> The first question I have is, how to associate keywords with a function?

MK> Keep in mind that a taxonomic description of code's content/concepts
MK> is entirely different from a coded object class hierarchy - the
MK> distinction is subtle and all to often overlooked... esp. by
MK> programmers who *are* in fact quite adept at creating taxonomy in
MK> code.

MK> Please consider examining the following standard for a comprehensive
MK> approach to accomplishing this task with optimal consideration of TRT.

MK> ANSI/NISO Z39.19-2005
MK> Guidelines for the Construction, Format, and Management of Monolingual
MK> Controlled Vocabularies
MK> ISBN: 1-880124-65-3

MK> Available here: http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-19-2005.pdf

Well, at 180 pages of dense information this is a serious standard.
Also it defines "taxonomy" as a structural hierarchical classification,
whereas I've used it loosely to mean a tag space.  I'll use "tag space"
from now on to be clear.

Since we're not classifying general knowledge but a very specific domain
(Emacs Lisp functions) I don't think the standard needs to be applied.
It makes some good points, but things like a full hierarchy are
overkill, and others like proper name conventions just don't apply.
I'll try to be consistent with its naming recommendations, at least.

It brings up "synonym rings" which may be necessary: I propose 50% of
the effort is to come from each package's predeclared Keywords header.
That's determined by the package author so it's not easy to enforce a
particular tag space over all of Emacs.  With synonym rings, we can
associate synonymous keywords together.

Once the list of keywords is established, you should take a look to see
if you agree with it or have suggestions for improvements.  I'll post
here.

Ted