67
votes
|
|
76
0
9
|
|
|
|
|
Propose your solution
Attachments
Duplicates
Comments
|
Cypher
wrote on the 6 Jun 08 at 09:15
|
|
|
|
KDE4.1 has this as logical layer on top of the hierarchical filesystem (look for Nepomuk). It is thus transparent to any other KDE4 application.
|
|
ronan
wrote on the 6 Jun 08 at 22:05
|
|
|
Cypher,
Nepomuk seems to be a good project
but what about all other applications including the so terminal that do not include nepomuk
Also it probably makes things slow.
nevermind85
hard links have do be manually set (for each tag/folder you want to put it) and if you want to remove a file for all tags/folder, you will have to go to all tag/folder to delete it.
|
|
jhoger
wrote on the 7 Jun 08 at 05:15
|
|
|
Given a tag-based file system, I think it is important to have lots of tags to automatically place on each file. This provides context to find old files even if you cannot remember the tag you used.
One good tag to place on files is the current task. But this would require knowing what project the user is working on. With a task-oriented UI, you would have that information.
|
|
|
|
Would this be in the VFS or the actual FS?
|
|
tx0
wrote on the 9 Sep 08 at 08:41
|
|
|
Hello, I'm the author of Tagsistant tag file system and Ubuntu user since last two years. I'm very interested in helping integrate a tag file system inside Ubuntu and I'm available to help the integration process.
Tagsistant is developed with ease of use for the average user as one of its primary goals. Some design choices that may sound unnatural at first glance are a direct consequence of the research of a intuitive interface both at shell prompt and inside a file manager.
I hope Ubuntu can get interested in it and someday will plan the integration.
Best wishes.
|
|
Endolith
wrote on the 15 Oct 08 at 04:53
|
|
|
This is a very great idea and would make Ubuntu actually better than other OSes instead of just playing catch-up. I am sure it won't get implemented until after Apple does it, though. :) "Hey, OS X uses tags instead of folders now! Can we do that?"
I've never liked the idea of categorizing files based on their file type, like with Microsoft's "My Pictures" or "My Music" folders. They should be categorized based on their content.
If you go on a fishing trip with your family, do you really want the photos to be in a Photos folder, the videos to be in a Videos folder, and maps and emails in completely different folders? Of course not. You want everything related in the "2008 Family Fishing Trip" folder.
With a tag-based system, they would automatically be tagged with metadata like the date they were taken: "date:2008-10-12", and you could also add descriptive tags like "family", "fishing trip", and "vacation". The images would automatically be tagged with something like "mime:image/jpeg", and the act of downloading them from your camera would automatically tag them with "Photos", to differentiate from other types of graphics that can be stored in jpegs. A map of the directions to the fishing hole, for instance, would have a "Maps" tag instead of "Photos", but would otherwise have all the other tags, so it would show alongside the photos if you searched for "2008 family fishing trip". The photos would be tagged with the name/ID of the person who took them, and then you could select a bunch of images and tag them with the names of the people that are in them.
Then you could navigate and find things by topic, by date, by file type, or any combination! You could type a friend's name and the word "photo" and instantly see every picture you own of them at once, or you could type the name of an event and view all the photos and other related files for a single event at once. Or you could type a name and an event and see all the pictures of them at that particular event, as well as emails to them about the event, etc.
|
|
Endolith
wrote on the 20 Oct 08 at 14:34
|
|
|
@nevermind85
"what about hardlinks?"
Hmmm... Are links supported by all filesystems? Maybe tags could be implemented as hard or soft links. The tags exist as folders (maybe hidden folders?) in the Home directory, and files would be linked into each folder if they were tagged. Then file browsers would interpret this with a more advanced interface.
The best solution would be independent of desktop and independent of file system.
|
|
Endolith
wrote on the 20 Oct 08 at 15:29
|
|
|
I guess neither symbolic links (relative paths, hard disk usage) or hard links (file system-dependent) would be sufficient for this. We don't want to use up tons of hard drive space with the tagging data for hundreds of thousands of files.
Surely this has been proposed before, though. What are the proposed implementations?
I imagine a system in which different "kinds" of properties of the file are encoded in the tag, and the human-readable GUI implementation of the tag might show different classes of tags ("names" given by the user vs file types generated by the system, for instance) in different colors, maybe. So if you searched for "jpeg" and "Family", the jpeg would be recognized as a file type and shown with some kind of filetype prefix and color, and the "Family" would be recognized as a user-generated label and given a different color?
This looks relevant:
http://www.foo.be/cgi-bin/wiki.pl/MachineTag
http://www.flickr.com/groups/api/discuss/72157594497877875/
|
|
Endolith
wrote on the 22 Oct 08 at 21:16
|
|
|
|
Also note that although files would be differentiated by tags, this would not function the same way as paths. Would it be like going backwards to a flat file where every file needs to have a unique name to avoid clashes?
|
|
|
The a tag-based filesystem could maintain a layer of compatibility with hierarchical filesystem.
For example:
cd /usr/share/hello-world
would work... but so would:
cd /hello-world/share/usr
or simply
cd /hello-world
(assuming there is only one hello-world in the filesystem)
|
|
|
Related:
Also I think that Metadata should be reformed. All metadata is currently done through different ways, usually information is just stored about the name of the file, the time the file was created, and the permissions.
MP3s use ID3 tags to store track information. This leads to problems with formating. But what if ID3 tags were done through the filesystem level? What if there was a tag for each author just like there would be for the time, or the name, this would end a lot of compatibility issues.
|
Post your comment
|
Blueprint tag-based-filesystem:
