How to combine tags with facets
Information architects (like me) tend to say we should combine different methods of increasing findability. In this post I'll explain one way of combining user generated metadata with editorial metadata, and more specifically, tags with facets. I'm not gonna do definitions and such (ok, I heard that collective sigh of relief!). The big advantage of adding metadata in the form of facets is that we know how to make an easy to use interface for facets. Check Flamenco. We could try adding ontology-like metadata, but we don't know yet how to create good interfaces with those. Let's look at your standard tagcloud page:
If we added a few facets to this it could look something like this (quick and nasty mockup):
Notice that the facets I came up with are relatively techie, reflecting delicious' userbase. If we dig deeper into the data, we'll probably find more facets like event, time and such. Other tagclouds might need different facets.
Also notice that this new arrangement makes it much easier for users to find something if they're looking for a specific item. It makes the tagcloud more browsable. And something I just noticed myself: we can bring up less popular items in less popular facets to the homepage.
The big difference in browsability (arg!) happens when a user moves into the tagcloud. When looking at a tag, they can refine their search by the various other facets (as is standard in faceted browsing systems). Check epinions.com for a nice example - if I had all day I'd mock it up. This makes it easy for a user to refine a search in a really large tagcloud.
How do we scale the assigning of tags to facets?
Simple: editors create facets (it takes some consideration to create a useful and valid facet), and users assign tags to facets. We can let users assign tags because facets are mutually exclusive, that is, tags can only logically be classified in 1 facet, not in multiple ones. So there should be little confusion as to what facet a tag should belong to (apart from the expected tags with more than 1 meaning). The mutual exclusivity comes from the editorial selection of facets: we choose our facets so that they are (at least pretty much) mutually exclusive. I expect a small number of facets (between 5 and 10) to be quite useful.
Asking users to assign tags to facets shouldn't be too hard. You can do it when they add a tag, or when they're browsing a tag that hasn't been assigned yet. The question can look something like this:
Again, because of the mutual exclusivity requirement for facets, disagreement on what facet a tag belongs to should be limited. So I would just let the system assume that each tag belongs to one facet.
So what do we know so far?
- We can let editors come up with a few useful facets, and let users assign tags to facets. This should work because of the mutual exclusivity requirement of facets: the hard work (creating facets) is done by editors, the easier work (assigning facets) is distributed (it is easy but a lot MORE work) amongst our users. This should work, and should scale.
- Once we have facets for some of our tags, browsing is made a lot easier for our users. The browsing interface is well known and tested, and should just work.
- This is good because we have now found a way to combine the strenghts of editors (ie., spend a whole afternoon considering what a certain facet should be) with the strength of user generated metadata (ie., you get lots of it if the decision is easy).
- Will users indeed find it easy to classify tags in facets without much disagreement? (They should if we create our facets following the exclusivity requirement.)
# Jun 3, 2005