[UX] Rename "taxonomy" to "Categorization" in the user interface

[jenlampton]

When people want to categorize their content, they don't think to themselves, "I want to add a system of taxonomy to my website", they think "how do I add categories?". We need to make our user-interfaces match the mental model of these users.

I propose that we change the word "Taxonomy" in the user interface to "Categories" everywhere it appears. I believe this was what it said back in Drupal 5 (or was it 4.7) and people had a much easier time with it back then.

Also up for debate: Is it worth renaming "Vocabularies" and "Terms" or would that do more harm than good?

Brainstorming of Issues

1. Taxonomy A. English speakers do not regularly use or understand the word "taxonomy"; it should be avoided wherever possible in Drupal. B. "Taxonomy" is largely equivalent to: classification, ontology [yes, a word even worse than "taxonomy"], categorization, organization, etc.
2. Vocabulary A. English speakers do not regularly use or understand the word "vocabulary" in any sense other than one's use of words in a given language; it should be avoided wherever possible in Drupal. B. "Vocabulary" is largely equivalent to: category, order, group, set, division, class, structure, cluster, hierarchy, tree, graph, network, etc.
3. Term A. "Term" isn't terrible but is also used rarely in English; when it is used, "term" frequently signifies time rather than an element. B. "Term" is largely equivalent to: tag, label, node [this goes to show how undistinctive, i.e. useless, "node" is], mnemonic, key, keyword, element, item, designation, etc.

Principles of Assessment

1. What is most intuitive to the beginning user?
2. Intermediate and expert users will adapt to any terminology that labels a set of features and is sufficiently described or discoverable, but for beginners the terminology is very important to the learning curve.
3. Don't worry about the exact definitions for any particular word: worry about perception, first impressions, and standard practice.

Let's Look to History (aka, there is nothing new under the sun)

• Initial creation of taxonomy.module (Apr. 2002)
• Should we rename "taxnomy" to "classification"? (Jun. 2003)
• Renamed 'taxonomy' menu to 'categories' for sake of usability. (Apr. 2004)
• Drupal terminology suggestions (Feb. 2006)
• Taxonomy module terminology (Feb. 2006)

[ericfg]

On 3/27/14 5:09 PM, Jen Lampton wrote:

When people want to categorize their content, they don't think to themselves, "I want to add a system of taxonomy to my website", they think "how do I add categories?". We need to make our user-interfaces match the mental model of these users.

I propose that we change the word "Taxonomy" in the user interface to "Categories" everywhere it appears. I believe this was what it said back in Drupal 5 (or was it 4.7) and people had a much easier time with it back then.

Also up for debate: Is it worth renaming "Vocabularies" and "Terms" or would that do more harm than good?

—

I think I was one of the voices that pushed hard for keeping the term Taxonomy back in the days of 4.7 (but I think at that point is was taxonomy vs tagging)

For me as far as drupal was concerned (and I assume this applies to backdrop), the taxonomy system is far more than simply a way of applying categories.

It allows for complex classifications, descriptions, relationships and categorization of data -- as well as drawing relationships between different terms (see also, related term, etc.)

Taxonomy is the word that best applies, it is a word that can be looked up in any dictionary and the definition of the term explains clearly what can be done with Taxonomies/vocabularies/terms.

I think that making this change would do more to confuse than it would help.

--Eric

[nedjo]

Part of the Drupal background is here: https://drupal.org/node/192209, the ticket where the taxonomy terminology was restored.

[ericfg]

On 3/27/14 5:56 PM, Nedjo Rogers wrote:

Part of the Drupal background is here: https://drupal.org/node/192209, the ticket where the taxonomy terminology was restored.

additional background https://drupal.org/node/97647

[kreynen]

Reposting from the meta issue...

Consider Taxonomy -> Categorizations. Instead of creating a Taxonomy, you'd be creating a Categorization then adding Categories to it. Think Jeopardy. When selecting US Presidents for $1000, most people won't describe US Presidents as a term in a category. It IS the category with questions "in" the category. Categorization (Jeopardy) > Category (US Presidents) > > Content (Question)

If the goal is to make this work from real people out of the box, they shouldn't need to look up the terminology used in the UI in a dictionary. While posting the history of Drupal's decision making process is interesting, anyone who's ever taught Drupal to someone that isn't a librarian or biologist knows the word Taxonomy takes longer to explain that process of categorizing content.

[ericfg]

If the goal is to make this work from real people out of the box, they shouldn't need to look up the terminology used in the UI in a dictionary. While posting the history of Drupal's decision making process is interesting, anyone who's even taught Drupal to someone that isn't a librarian or biologist knows the word Taxonomy takes longer to explain that process of categorizing content.

Well, as you know I have taught librarians and advocated for free software in general and drupal in specific in the library world for a long time and I've found that people that know cataloging or are data professionals understand the idea of taxonomy pretty quickly if not immediately.

However, I do see the argument for making it simple for anyone (the average site implementer) without having to look up terms. I guess I just think that taxonomy is the right term and I like using intelligent terms and not dumbing things down assuming people are not smart enough.

Categorization in place of taxonomy; Category Set instead of vocabulary and Category instead of term (or keep term as it is) seems reasonable to me based on the preferences being stated by most people in this thread (even if I still would prefer taxonomy, as long as we don't call it Tagging, I can live with the compromise)

[dboulet]

In my opinion, this comes down a classic problem in Drupal, which is this: the admin UI is shared between developers/site builders and end users/content creators.

With a few UI improvements, we can make it so a content creator would never have to visit the Taxonomy page at all:

1. Allow taxonomy terms to be managed in the Content section

   A good example of this is in Wordpress: each content type has its own section and any vocabularies relevant to that content type have a page to manage terms right in that section.

2. Improve the taxonomy term widget to allow terms to be added directly from the content add form

   Again, if we look to Wordpress: there’s an Add New Category link right in the widget so that terms can be added without leaving the Add Post page.

If done right, the average user never has to see the words Taxonomy, Vocabulary, or Term at all. Leave those to the site builders/developers, who understand them already or if not, are ready to learn about them in the docs.

[jenlampton]

I have to agree with @kreynen on categories vs taxonomy. I've trained enough hundreds of people who just don't get taxonomy as a label. Changing the menu link (and url) to "Categories" just makes more sense to people. Yes, it is a system of taxonomy - that is the correct name for it - but I don't think it matters. Back in Drupal 4.7 there was a huge number of people using the "Categories" module because they didn't know Drupal had categories, and thats because in the UI it was called taxonomy.

I also agree with @dboulet that we should be looking to wordpress for hits on how to improve our UI. The ability to add a new term (if you have that permission) directly from a node page would be fantastic. We're getting a bit off topic here, but I wonder, how does wordpress handle the UI if a vocabulary is on multiple node types? Does the UI get repeated for each one?

I'd be okay with using "Categorization" instead of "Categories", if that helps at all. The main thing I'm after is helping get people to the part of the admin that does what they want.

[dboulet]

Moving away from “Taxonomy” is not a bad idea, but I would vote against the word “Categories” since sites very often already have a vocabulary named “Categories”. We would then be editing categories within Categories within the Categories page—confusing.

[jenlampton]

I'm going to create a PR that uses "Categorization" and we'll see how that feels.

[quicksketch]

I'm not too keen on the PR. I'm not a fan of the word "taxonomy" in any way, but I feel that changing the URLs for one of our more critical systems goes against our philosophy of limiting change when possible. Especially since we don't have a clear winner here, I can see this causing a lot more complaining than celebration.

For now I've closed the PR at https://github.com/backdrop/backdrop/pull/448, we can use it as the basis for a renaming at a later time if we pick this back up again in 2.x.

[docwilmot]

We should do this.

[klonos]

When I see any of the two words, I can't help my Greek nature kicking in. They both make sense to me as they would to any Greek person. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't feel strong about any one word in particular.

[sutibun]

I remember when I first got into Drupal, I didn't understand taxonomy and I like to think I am fairly technical. Only because I once participated in a biology-related internship years before that I kind of got an inkling. I had to create a few vocabularies, itself another weird name, and play around with a few dummy examples to see if I understood correctly.

Fast forward to a few months ago while building a Drupal site for someone else (someone I don't consider a dumb average user)... and I didn't know how to explain taxonomy and vocabulary. They understood what a category and tag was, just not the rest.

Suggestions

Anyway, I don't claim to have the answer but I thought about the way Drupal/Backdrop goes about it

• Taxonomy > Vocabulary > Tags
• Taxonomy > Vocabulary > Category

and some alternate words came up such as Organize, Catalog, Label, Sort, File, Index, Classify, Catalog, Peg, Designate, Assign.

And that got me thinking.

So, here are some ideas I am throwing out there. They sound less high falutin and more down to earth.

Sort of.

I just don't know if they make sense as I think it does.

Idea 1

• Label > Catalog type > Tag
• Label > Catalog type > Category

Idea 2

• Organize content > Label type > Category
• Organize content > Label type > Tags

Thinking behind this

I like the word "Label".

When I think of label, I think of labeling boxes. We can even use visuals to help give context (a box label icon or maybe even a pricing gun)

• In the physical world, you need to "have a Labeling system in place to organize merchandise."
• In the online world, you need to "Label your content with tags and categories."

That's my line of thinking.

If I had to choose, I like "Organize content > Label type > Tags" best.

What do you guys think?

[klonos]

I like the word "Label".

The only thing with "label" is that we already use it in other, important places. Predominantly for field labels. That would complicate things instead of simplifying them I'm afraid.

[klonos]

...one thing I've noticed is that we use both "tags" and "terms" in the UI/menu:

We should stick to one. If we keep "vocabularies", then I believe "terms" is more suitable than tags. If we decide to change to something like "categories", then I think "tags" fits better.

What do you think about this:

Structure -> Tag content -> Tag groups -> Tags

[klonos]

...or:

Structure -> Content tags -> Tag groups -> Tags

in place of:

Structure -> Taxonomy -> Vocabularies -> Terms

I think that it'd be easier to grasp and remember that:

• there are "tags"
• you can use them to tag content (assign tags to content)
• you can group them in "tag groups"

So "tags", "tag" (the verb) and "tag group"! It kinda feels as if the three/four terms ("taxonomy", "vocabularies" and "tags"/"terms") are reduced to only one. People only have to remember the word "tag". :wink:

[Graham-72]

:+1: So much easier to say too.

[quicksketch]

...one thing I've noticed is that we use both "tags" and "terms" in the UI/menu:

It's not that we use both, but that "Tags" is the default vocabulary that comes with the standard.profile. You can delete the Tags vocabulary if you so choose.

I do like that this would simplify down the terminology a bit.

• Term => Tag
• Vocabulary => Tag group

Though "Tag group" seems a little bit of a strange name, I think users would be able to grasp it more quickly than a "Vocabulary" or "Taxonomy".

[sutibun]

Replacing Taxonomy

I actually like "Tag content". (the verb)

If you're looking to add tags to your content, the fact "tag" is in "Tag content" makes it obvious where to go as opposed to "Taxonomy", which is like another language to the majority of users.

Though I will add, at first sight I wasn't sure what "Tag content" meant as a whole. I had to think about it a little. I initially took the first word as a noun. Maybe "Tag your content" so it's clearer we're talking about the verb?

Replacing Vocabulary

I don't know about "tag groups" though. Still can't wrap my head around that. How about "Tag type"?

I like creating sentences using these very words to see if I can make sense of them.

In Backdrop, we can create content like an Article or a Page BUT, at the same time, we can create our own type of content (content types) if we choose to.

Maybe we can have a similar line of thinking here.

In Backdrop, we can tag content with a Category or a Tag BUT, at the same time, we can create our own type of tags (tag type), our custom tagging system, if we choose to.

How does "tag type" sound?

Other alternatives for vocabulary

These also came up. Dumping them here as it might help spark an idea

• Tag content > Tagging system
• Tag content > Labeling system
• Tag content > Classification system
• Tag content > categorization type (not sure I like this one)
• Label your content > Label type > Marker (or Ticket?)

They're not great but more indicative than "Vocabulary".

Replacing Term

To replace Term, maybe "Tag element" or "Tag marker"? I'm not sure here.

We can't use Term here since that only makes "sense" when talking about Vocabulary"

Summary

In other words, instead of

• "Taxonomy > Vocabulary > Term"

we'd have:

• "Tag content > Tag type > Tag element" OR
• "Tag your content > Tag type > Tag element"

Of course, if we can have that, I suppose we can also consider:

• "Categorize content > Category type > Category element

On a sidenote, whatever we choose, how about adding descriptive text on the Taxonomy page saying something along the lines of

"Just like you apply labels on boxes to identify, sort, & organize them, so too can you label your content with tags and categories to better group and organize them."

Analogies help clarify muddy situations.

[ghost]

Is this discussion still relevant for 1.x? If so, I like 'tags' and 'tag groups' (or 'tag types').

I'm also wondering if we can introduce the new terminology in 1.x as changes just to the human labels/menu items (while keeping the existing terminology in the machine names/URLs), and then change everything to the new terminology in 2.x...?

[jenlampton]

Changing strings breaks translations. This means D7 translations and Backdrop 1.x translations will need to be updated to work on newer versions.

Changing URLs is now safe in 1.x, thanks to backdrop_goto_deprecated().

If I were looking for a way to categorize my content, I wouldn't look for something called Taxonomy and I'm not sire I'd look for something called Tags either.

I'd prefer Taxonomy => Categorization Vocabulary => Category Type / Group / Set / Collection Term => Category

Another thought: We are already using Tag as a field label so that might get confusing if we also had tags as a structural item.

[klonos]

🤔

[jenlampton]

This old PR had way to many merge conflicts... removing label.

Naming things is hard, let's push the renaming of vocabularies and terms to 2.x, but change Taxonomy now. Maybe it will be easier to get a consensus?