• prashanthvsdvn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    9 months ago

    Nested Tags for contacts. Ability to add sub tags like Friends/BowlingGroup or Acquaintance/LocalChurchContact

    I seriously don’t understand what’s difficult to tag contacts like this and ability to use them to message a group. It’s a serious no-brainer feature but not to be found anywhere.

    • maryjayjay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      As a software engineer I’m interested in the value that would add over simply having combinations of the tags as is possible now

      • PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I think the question boils down to something like “For this data set, is there information captured by a tree representation that’s not captured by a list of categories?” Trees, or graphs in general, can capture path-based relationships. Categories are based of course on set theory.

        I think both have their place, and like anything within mathematics or programming it comes down to which metaphor more naturally and easily expresses what you’re trying to do. I find trees and graphs easy to think about and represent visually, but it all depends on the problem space and the approach.

        Note: This is assuming the kind of “tree” we implement permits multiple inheritance if needed.

      • prashanthvsdvn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        These kind of tags are supported in all kinds of note taking apps. I don’t think it would be an Hercularian task to achieve it.

        • maryjayjay@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          You’re right, it’s almost trivial.

          But as someone who designs software I don’t immediately see any additional functionality. I’d like to understand the benefit to see if I want to incorporate the feature sometime

    • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Wasn’t this the central premise of Google Plus?

      I guess strict nesting wasn’t possible, but strictly enforcing nesting would be problematic: the bowling group might have acquaintances, friends, and your actual brother.

      • prashanthvsdvn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Can you give more context or an example. Is it like sort of Obsidian graph but the nodes are all contacts or something?

        • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          As an example: https://linkedpeople.net/person/Q358587

          But admittedly, I’ve just watched two videos on using Knowledge graphs with WikiData and Obsidian to make a personalized attempt at exobrains with AI, so I am biased to think it’s a good idea in general right now. I really like the idea of not just sorting by tag, but being able to get complex relations out of my personal data, so I can stop having to remember things like “ok so who all is a dev working on this project that would know something about the backend to the search function” and instead use data both available and inputed to get a list of contacts to review. It just gets to be a mess when teams get too large or too many interworking teams! You could extrapolate it to other interpersonal planning and coordination things too like “who would like to play a dungeon crawl for the next few weekends?”, grabbing both calander data where we can, maybe personal notes about whether they can make it to things regularly or be upcoming things for them, and whether they like those kinds of games. Not everything would be known of course, still gotta actually ask people, make a plan, etc, but make it easier you know?