organize the tags in hierarchical order?

I have lots of tags. I would like to organize them in a logical order, for example: tag ‘material’ - sub-tags - ‘metal’ ‘wool’ ‘clay’ aso. (the tag 'material is then like a folder).
if I drag a file over the tag ‘metal’ it also gets the tag ‘material’ - and I don’t want it. can I avoid this?

No (modified per the post immediately after this one). Not if you want to preserve the ability to use the parent tag.

Yes. Control-click on “material” and choose “Exclude from tagging”.

Tom S.

The following (and I assume the foregoing) apply to tags in the Tags group.

Techically true, but then be aware that the parent tag disappears from anything it was assigned to. If you wanted to use that parent tag, this is not the way to go.

If the hierarchy is

purple

berry

grape

and you exclude “purple” from tagging, anything with the “purple” tag no longer has that tag. If, elsewhere, you then tag a document “purple”, DT creates a new “purple” tag - and so you have a duplicated tag in Tags. In a complex hierarchy, this will get messy very quickly.

The logic of hierarchies is that an item assigned to a property within a hierarchy automatically assumes the properties of members of higher levels in the hierarchy. That’s what hierarchies are all about.

For example, if there’s a hierarchy Vertebrate > Mammal > Canine, and one wishes to assign a document about wolves to that hierarchy, the appropriate assignment would be at the deepest level, “Canine”. Automatically, one then knows that wolves are vertebrates and they are mammals.

Don’t use a hierarchical scheme if that’s not what you intended or needed.

Quite true. I do this but only to keep my tags organized so I can find them (or more specifically so I can remember what name I assigned to them :slight_smile: ). If this was not the OP’s intent then it’s not going to work.

Tom S.

that’s exactly what I want! like this I have a logical way to tag all similar docs in a same way! I can organize the tags in groups which stay for a certain kind of documents…! thanks!

Just curious - why use the tags to do this rather than a “normal” group hierarchy? (And normal groups can be tags when they are “included” for tagging - i.e., not “excluded”.) Yours is a technique I’ve not considered before – does it speed tagging of similar docs somehow?

I use extensive use of this myself-I create tag bundles (instead of calling it a tag hierarchy) in all my databases. I preface the tag bundles with a ‘/’ slash to denote that they are tag bundles rather than regular groups. I also use (sparingly) tag hierarchies in my normal groups. The reasons that I like it include:

  1. It is easier to select multiple, related tags to get a ‘TagA’ OR ‘TagB’ OR ‘TagC’ list, unlike the Tags view that gives a ‘TagA’ AND ‘TagB’ AND ‘TagC’ list. I just expand the tag bundles if needed to access the tags I am looking for.

  2. It cleans up the list under ‘Tags’ so if I import documents that add new tag(s) to the database, those new tags will appear alone at the bottom of the list of tag bundles. If I want to keep the tag(s), I drag them to an appropriate bundle. Or, I will drag them to an ‘/Unfilled’ bundle to monitor if there is justification for keeping the tags. I’ve really tried to cut down and consolidate the number of tags that I have that are only applied to a few documents. Otherwise, if I know I will never need the new tags, I delete them. With all tags loose under ‘Tags’ new, unwanted tags get lost in the clutter.

Hi, Korm.

In my case this is a complex question having to do with what I consider to be a “group”. Basically this is defined (for me) as anything that you could reasonably expect DT to autoclassify based upon content. In my world, a “tag” is anything that DT wouldn’t usually autoclassify. For instance, DT wouldn’t suggest that I put an email into a “Correspondence” group based upon the kind of file it is. So “Correspondence” is a tag (which also classifies things like Word files, scanned letters, etc…).

I have probably about 25 or so of these tags (the list is growing). Because I can never remember exactly what I named them, I need to be able to easily find them in the “Tags” group. So I use groups which are excluded from tagging to containg them and make them easyier to hunt down.

Tom S.

Thanks, Tom and Greg. Very interesting food for thought. Good examples of how DT can meet many different use cases.