w0nk042
commented
2 years ago I would propose that a strict hierarchy does not reflect the universe of discourse we are trying to categorise. I know, for instance, in my blog that when I post a record of a fold, I use both categories and tags to describe the fold. I tried an exclusive category system but failed to arrive at a "choose one from this list" list that I could use one per fold. Instead I use broad categories (multiple per model as dictated by the characteristics of the model) that describe things like figurative (animal, plant, humanoid), genre (fantasy, abstract, geometric, organic), technique (tessellation, modular, box pleating, 22.5 degree), paper (duo, double tissue, unryushi), base (preliminary, elias, fish), shape of initial sheet (square, equilateral triangle, 1:root3), number of sheets (single, 30), difficulty (complex, mind-buggering). I also TAG models with things like Designer Name, whether it was folded via a diagram or CP, time to fold etc.
Models and categories (and tags) relate in a many:many way (a model can have many categories and a category can be the category of many models) - sorry, thinking database design here ... which is not unrelated to your quest.
For any category system to be of use in this sphere, it must allow useful model metadata to be captured and searched meaningfully. I am not convinced a hierarchical model is sufficient as the things we are trying to jam into the hierarchy fit in many places, and then not tidily nor exclusively - deciding the primary organiser is a purely subjective or arbitrary choice,
mkosmul
Thicket, not tree — On Origami Classification, Part I - Origami by Michał Kosmulski
Origami classification resembles a thicket of intertwining shrubs rather than a tree When you ask origami creators what types of origami they design, you hear terms such as traditional, modular, supercomplex, tessellations or dollar-bill origami. Most origami websites also group models into similar categories. On the face of it, it looks like there is a widely used and understood classification system for origami designs. Unfortunately, upon closer inspection, this “system” falls apart, showing it is not a system at all, but rather just a bunch of names used for a few commonly folded types of models. These types overlap in some places while leaving out some models without any classification in others. Some are
https://origami.kosmulski.org/blog/2022-01-29-origami-classification-part-i