组织大量的东西 - 可用性和 UI 观点
在我们的应用程序中，我们有一个包含事物的存储库（它们称为方法和查询，但这与这个问题并不特别相关）。每件事都有一个标题、描述（尽管有些可能两者都没有）和一些其他数据。用户将内容保存到存储库并从存储库加载和使用内容。
我想知道从可用性的角度来看组织存储库的最佳方式是什么。似乎有两种主要方法。第一种方法是将内容放入文件夹、子文件夹等中，并具有类似于文件系统的分层结构。第二种方法（已经变得流行）是两个都有一个平坦的空间，并为每个事物分配零个或多个标签，以便用户可以查看特定标签的事物列表。
目前我们使用平面空间、标签和搜索。看起来有些难以管理。我不确定切换到文件夹/子文件夹是否会使其更好。
我想更多地了解每种方法的优缺点，以及收藏品和物品本身的哪些属性建议使用一种或另一种方法或两者的组合。如果有人能给我指出一些研究或讨论，我将非常感激。
In our application we have a repository that contains things (they are called methods and queries, but this is not particularly relevant for this question). Each thing has a title, description (though some may lack both) and some other data. Users save things to repository and load and use things from repository.
I wonder what is the best way to organize the repository from usability point of view. There seems to be two major approaches. The first approach is to put things in folders, subfolders and so on, and have a hierarchical structure similar to a filesystem. The second approach (that has become fashionable) is two have a flat space and assign zero or more tags to each thing, so that users can view a list of things for a particular tag.
Currently we use flat space, tags and search. It appears to be somewhat unmanageable. I am not sure if switching to folders/subfolders will make it better.
I would like to learn more about the pros and cons of each approach and what properties of the collection and the things themselves suggest using one or another approach or a combination of both. If anybody can point me to some studies or discussions of those, I would really appreciate that.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（3）
您没有理由不能同时使用这两种方法。在某种程度上，寻找事物取决于事物是什么以及寻找它的原因。当人们知道他们在寻找什么时，分层设计可以很好地工作，而当结构不太明显时，基于标签/关键字的系统可以更好地工作。
此外，链接类似事物的网络结构也可以非常好，正如您在互联网或维基百科上看到的那样。
There is no reason you can't use both methods. To some extent finding things is dependent upon what the thing is and why it is being looked for. A hierachical design can work well when somebody knows what they are looking for and a tag / keyword based system can work better when the structure is less obvious.
Also a network structure that links similar things can also be very good as you can see with the internet or a wikipedia.
在这种情况下，我使用对称定律来帮助我。
首先，您在后端构建树状结构，然后为前端构建标签系统。
您可以使用两者来组织数据收集。
I use the law of symmetry to help me in this situation.
First you build the tree like structure in the back end and then build the tagging system for the front end.
You use both to organize your data collection.
标签云比层次结构效果更好
分类法不确定，
（“这是小型汽车还是大型卡车？”）
没有分类的中央机构
没有明显的分类或类之间的自然顺序
（汽车可以按颜色或尺寸分类，颜色和尺寸之间没有明显的等级）
可以动态创建新类别
否则，层次结构会提供更多信息对完整性的信心，因为每一项都有一个明显正确的位置：我是否找到了关于鸟类的所有文档？真的没有关于五层楼的文件吗？
标签云需要一些维护，我不确定这是否可以完全由用户提供：
处理同义词，标签同义词，合并标签，澄清标签（例如“蓝色”是一种感觉还是一种颜色？）
另一个选项是属性值对。它们可以建立在维护良好的标签云上，例如将“红/黑/蓝”标签分组在“颜色”下。它们还可以使用浮动值，如果结果不足（例如年龄、日期，甚至是颜色等多维），搜索可以扩展到类似的值。
然而，这需要提前知道用户需要什么搜索条件。如果您需要引入新类别，则需要重新标记整个文档正文。
另请参阅我的澄清请求：有什么问题？标签不够多？标记为不同的？用户找不到他们想要的东西？用户对搜索结果不自信？
A tag cloud works better than a hierarchy if
the taxonomy is uncertain
("Now is this a small car or a large truck?")
there is no central authority for classification
there is no obivous or natural order between the classes
(cars can be classified by color or by size, there is no obvious rank between color and size)
new categories may be created on the fly
Otherwise, a hierarchy gives more confidence in completeness, as every item has exactly one obviously correct location: did I find all documents about birds? Is there really no document about five-story houses?
Tag clouds need some maintenance, I am not sure if this can be completely user-provided:
Dealing with synonyms, tag synonyms, merging tags, clarifying tags (e.g. is "blue" a feeling or a color?)
Another option are attribute-value pairs. They can be built upon a well-maintained tag cloud, e.g. grouping "red / black / blue" tags under "color". They can also work with floating values, search can be extended to similar values in case of not enough results (such as age, date, even multidimensionals like color).
However, this requires to know ahead what search criteria users need. If you need to introduce a new category, you need to re-tag the entire body of documents.
See also my request for clarification: what are the problems? Not enough tagging? tagging to distinct? Users not finding what they are loking for? Users not confident in search results?