Tags and Tag groups with same name

[Mammut]

I don't know if it is intended or not, but if there is already a Tag named "test", I can't create a Tag Group named "test" or even "TEST".

 

Although I think it would be better if there could be a Tag and a Tag Group with the same name.

[WilfriedB]

What I really don't like is the fact that you don't even get an error message, when you try to create a group with a name, which already exists as a tag.

[WilfriedB]

Although I think it would be better if there could be a Tag and a Tag Group with the same name.

Mammut, do you have an example, why you think, it might made sense to call a tag the same as a group?

I ran into this issue, because I wanted to "convert" a tag in the top level of a hierarchy to a group and found an easy way around:

I had a category named "Architecture" with several sub-tags and wanted it to be a group instead. So, I created a group with the name "Architecture1", moved all sub-tags with drag & drop from "Architecture" to "Architecture1", deleted the tag "Architecture" and renamed the group "Architecture1" to "Architecture" .

Not sure, if it really makes sense, but you can create a tag "Architecture" inside the group "Architecture". I tried it, only for the sake to understand how tag groups work.

[Mammut]

Mammut, do you have an example, why you think, it might made sense to call a tag the same as a group?

I ran into this issue, because I wanted to "convert" a tag in the top level of a hierarchy to a group and found an easy way around:

I had a category named "Architecture" with several sub-tags and wanted it to be a group instead. So, I created a group with the name "Architecture1", moved all sub-tags with drag & drop from "Architecture" to "Architecture1", deleted the tag "Architecture" and renamed the group "Architecture1" to "Architecture" .

Not sure, if it really makes sense, but you can create a tag "Architecture" inside the group "Architecture". I tried it, only for the sake to understand how tag groups work.

 

Only for comfort reasons, so i don't have to create "name1" group than rename it after drag and drop the tags. There are a lot of these small things which are not so annoying at first, but if you start to work with a lot of files you realize that these small extra steps takes a lot of extra time.

[WilfriedB]

In my opinion, the possibility of having a group called the same as a topmost level tag would potentially create more confusion than benefits. For the sake of being able to convert a tag into a group, I would rather prefer an even easier solution, for example a selectable option.

 

However, at this point I am not sure I understand all differences between a group and a tag. For now, I understand it this way:

• Groups cannot be nested and appear only in the highest hierarchy of each tag, but they can contain a tree of tags
• Unlike to hierarchical tags, group names are not written to or read from the embedded metadata. However, I do not know what happens, when an image is imported, which contains a tag, which exists as a group name.

[Mammut]

Well, a group is mainly a visual feature, so you can't search for it neither. At least I think, I didn't test that yet.

[WilfriedB]

... so you can't search for it neither.

Not quite correct:

• You can indeed search for the group name in the Catalog Tags view by entering its name in the search field <Filter Tags>.
• You can also search for all images under a certain group by clicking the circle or by building an "Advanced" search yourself. But you are right in the sense that you get a result only, when you include sub-tags with the search. In other words when you Shift-click the group, you don't get any results.

At least, the above did work for me. However, I did have some difficulties, importing images which were already tagged with categories which are members of a group. Mostly those tags appeared as upper most level and I had to move the tag (with drag & drop or cut & paste) into the group. In one case, I did not find the tag at all. For the latter, I need do more testing.

Edited June 28, 2014 by Wilfried

[Mammut]

Well, it's not good then.

[WilfriedB]

Well, it's not good then.

 

Not sure, I'd call it that way. For now, I don't know if it is still "work in progress" or a " bug to be solved" or does it "work as designed"? In the latter case, we need to understand better what the intentions of the developers were and whether or how we can use it for our purposes.