Streamlining a category hierarchy

Hi -- I'm new here, so I'm hoping this isn't an FAQ (I did check the FAQ first, though).

Before I start, I should note that I have a vested interest in this topic: I'm the senior fiction editor for an online speculative-fiction magazine. I first noticed the stuff I'm talking about here because there are several different categories that our magazine could appear in, and as far as I can tell, there don't appear to be regularly-followed criteria for putting a publication in one of those categories instead of another. (We are currently listed in one of those categories, btw; I'm not asking which category we should be listed in.)

So what I'm wondering is whether there's a way to combine categories.

There are two parts to that question:

1. In general, if I want to propose a streamlining of categories, what's the best way to go about making such a proposal?

2. In this particular case, what do you think of my particular proposal?


Regarding the general case:

I would be happy to apply to be a category editor, but what I'd really like is to change what the categories are, and I'm not sure that becoming an editor of one of the categories in question would help achieve that. But if becoming an editor is the right first step, let me know and I'll apply.


Regarding this particular case:

I've gone through the whole category hierarchy and found what I think are all of the most relevant categories and subcategories, and I've come up with a straw-person proposal (i.e., I expect it to be knocked apart) for a way to streamline those categories and make some small tweaks to the relevant parts of the category hierarchy. But I don't want to just jump in and start posting a full detailed proposal here if this isn't the appropriate forum. If you'd be interested in all the details, I'll be very happy to post them or email them; just let me know.

Here's a summary, though, of my concerns about this part of the category hierarchy, with some examples (and I'm sorry that even the summary is so long):


1. In some areas, there are separate categories for "Science Fiction" and "Fantasy," but in most such areas, the sites listed are for both. For example, in Arts > Literature > Genres > Fantasy > Magazines and E-zines subcategory, there are at least 9 sites whose descriptions explicitly say that they're for both science fiction and fantasy; in Arts > Literature > Genres > Science Fiction, there are at least 25 such explicitly mixed-genre sites (and I happen to know that most of the rest are also mixed SF and F even though they don't say so explicitly in the descriptions here). If a site is solely dedicated to one or the other, I can see that it would make sense to have both categories, but given that most SFF sites are interested in both, I'd like to see the "Science Fiction" and "Fantasy" categories combined -- at least for online magazines.


2. There are parts of the hierarchy that are essentially about the same topic, but that aren't directly connected to each other. In particular, it seems to me that there's no clear distinction among the sites listed in these three categories:

A. Arts > Online Writing > E-zines > Fiction > Science Fiction and Fantasy

B. Arts > Literature > Genres > Fantasy > Magazines and E-zines

C. Arts > Literature > Genres > Science Fiction > Magazines and E-zines

I'd love to see those three combined into one. (Just to be clear: I can imagine making distinctions among those topics, but the current contents of those topics don't appear to reflect such distinctions -- most of the items currently in any one of those topics could as easily go in either of the other topics.)


3. There are other places where there are no subcategories but should be; for example, there's an Arts > Online Writing > Fiction > Genres > Science Fiction > E-zines (which is a link to item A, above), but no corresponding E-zines subcategory for Fantasy.


4. The distinction between "Literature", "E-zines", and "Online Writing" isn't one that was clear to me until I read the category definitions. My impression after reading the definitions is that Literature is for published material printed on paper, E-zines is for magazines published online, and Online Writing is for self-published material or other material that doesn't go through an editorial selection process. But those distinctions aren't entirely reflected in the category hierarchy; for example, the Online Writing category's hierarchy contains E-zines subcategories, as does the Literature category, and the Arts > Genres > Science Fiction and Fantasy category doesn't contain any links or subcategories for e-zines or online writing. ...And on a related side note, in one place in the hierarchy there's a link named "Web-Published Fiction" rather than "Online Writing".


So the basic idea of my straw-person proposal is to collect all the science fiction & fantasy online magazines in one category (such as Arts > Genres > Science Fiction and Fantasy > Magazines and E-zines), and to link to that category from other places. In the process, I think it may be possible to slightly simplify some of the related category structures.


Again, I'd be happy to post full details if you're interested, but I've probably already posted way more than you wanted to see from a total newbie. So I'll close here.

I hope this proposal doesn't step on toes; I know in communities like this one it's often best to join the community and work your way up through the ranks before making this kind of suggestion. And I know that outsiders who make such suggestions are often missing the big picture, unaware of things that make such proposal infeasible. But I'm hoping in this case that there's enough merit to at least items 1 and 2 above that you'll consider them anyway.

But if the right thing for me to do is pick one of the categories and apply to be an editor, lemme know and I'll do that.

Thanks for all your hard work, and for providing the Directory!

Yes, this is a place for such a proposal. And it partly does and partly doesn't step on toes. (Not bad for a straw man.)

The best place for it is in the Arts forums, available only to editors. And the best first try would be to apply to edit one of the categories. I hope that pans out; if not, we can take this proposal back to the editor forums. The line between Lit and Online Writing has not always been followed; it probably is time for another look.

I'd like to see the "Science Fiction" and "Fantasy" categories combined

Click to expand...

We have discussed this from time to time, but have never fully agreed on doing it. Some have been combined, some haven't. A good active editor in one of the categories could help to get something done, so by all means apply, if you have the interest. (Be warned, though, I joined in an E-zines cat, got addicted, and here I still am 5 years later )

Online Writing is for writing that does not appear in print, which does not necessarily mean that it has to be self-published. In Literature, purely online e-zines must at least be about published writing. Some exceptions are made from time to time, though. There is a Journals category in Literature for the more scholarly publications, whether they are online or print.

There are still some problems with the current set-up that haven't been worked out (like the Sci-fi/Fantasy issue), and new ideas are always welcome. You can always mention this thread when you apply, too, to at least show that you have some ideas and demonstrate what type of editor you would be.

As both a fan and a writer I find the merging of the Fantasy and SCiFi into one cat both inaccurate and less than useful. They are not the same, though often appeal to the same people, both writers and fans. Additionally the intent of the directory is to make things easier to locate - that isn't accomplished my merging different genres together and making the user sort them out.

Combined scifi/fantasy sites should be sorted based on the predominant content. The issue really is more one of editorial process than any real flaw in ontology.

IMHO

Callimachus, that argument has been made, and in part it has merit.

The opposite argument is that (1) there is not always a clear distinction; (2) Other important taxonomies (e.g., libraries and bookstores) do not even attempt to make a distinction; (3) Many authors operate in both areas; many fans are interested in both areas; and many of the websites cover both. (So, if the fans and the authors and the libraries can't tell them apart, it will be easier for everyone to find them if they are all together. And, of course, if people are already used to finding them together everywhere else, it will be easier for them to find them together here.

One point you raised should be singled out for special opprobrium. "Combined scifi/fantasy sites should be sorted based on the predominant content" is an untenable tenet. We make our theory fit reality, not the other way round. So we must have a good way of representing the crossover reality -- ignoring it is not acceptable.

The hard data, by the way, will cause part (but, I think, not all) of the inconsistencies you mention. But, however we set up the taxonomy, the real hard work is fitting new data to it, and vice versa. I hope you're still considering applying to be an editor: try your hand at some of the live data, make some specific proposals (define new categories, and build samples in your Bookmarks to see how they work in practice. If you can show (not persuade) people they really work, changes will be made. But always, the biggest problem is not imposing an ideal structure, but balancing competing ideals.

I started complaining about Arts/Literature categories my first week as an editor -- maybe my first day. It took months (and thousands of edits) to get some of the major changes made; by the end of it I was an editall doing some of the hacking and repacking. (The structure you see today, with all its shortcomings, is still a big improvement.)

The opposite argument is that (1) there is not always a clear distinction; (2) Other important taxonomies (e.g., libraries and bookstores) do not even attempt to make a distinction; (3) Many authors operate in both areas; many fans are interested in both areas; and many of the websites cover both. (So, if the fans and the authors and the libraries can't tell them apart, it will be easier for everyone to find them if they are all together. And, of course, if people are already used to finding them together everywhere else, it will be easier for them to find them together here.

Click to expand...

I'll have to agree to disagree with this one. Most well organized bookstores do indeed seperate SciFi and Fantasy on their shelves, though they are quite reasonably displayed in the same section of the store. Libraries as well make the distinction though it may not be as obvious due to the cataloging vs shelving constraints.

Callimachus said:

Most well organized bookstores do indeed separate SciFi and Fantasy on their shelves

Click to expand...

I wish!

Even the World's Biggest Bookstore (I really don't think it's truly the biggest anymore) which I think has the world's best selection of SciFi and Fantasy and is relatively well organized has never separated them into their own sections. I can never figure out how come they can figure out that mysteries and romance are separate genres, but for some reason fantasy and scifi are all the same. Even speciality stores like Bakka which only sells SciFi and Fantasy doesn't separate them out. It's annoying.

I have to agree -- I've yet to go to a physical bookstore that separates them out.

That's interesting! The standard for bookshops here in Sweden is definitely to separate them. Ditto for libraries, at least the large ones.

That aside, the genre definition question is definitely not clear, even (or maybe in particular) among the fans. Some say that either genre is a subgenre of the other one (usually that fantasy is a subset of sf), others that they are very separate. Fantasy is probably easier to define than sf, but the line between fantasy and mainstream can be very blurred...

Hmm. Maybe I'll have to get involved in these categories

It might be a possible solution to have one category, Literature/Fantasy_and_Science_Fiction, with two subcategories, Literature/Fantasy_and_Science_Fiction/Fantasy and Literature/Fantasy_and_Science_Fiction/Science_Fiction. Then crossover stuff can go in the parent category. The downside to this is the horrible repetition in those path names. I'm sure there's a more elegant solution to the issue of fantasy/sci-fi crossover somewhere. Perhaps we should take this to the internal forum so that more editors might comment on it?

As a fan of both genres I would just as soon see them combined. Usenet has settled on a heirarchy utilizing rec.arts.st.* . The sf there has been reinterpreted as meaning speculative fiction, which encompasses both SciFi and Fantasy. I know some readers like one and not the other category and so would object, but for practical reasons using the Spec Fic term would seem to be a good. Since many editors seem to be interested perhaps this may be discussed again in the internal fora?

I've mentioned, in the internal editor forum, a different problem -- many of the sites under Arts/Literature/Genres/Science_Fiction or Arts/Literature/Genres/Fantasy belong in Arts/Genres/Science_Fiction_and_Fantasy (under the present subdivision), as they're not about Literature per se. (Yes, I noticed that inconsistency, also.)

I wish elysdir luck if he/she wishes to apply to become an editor, and push some such reorganization. An editor who joined the same time I did was co-leader of a major reorganization (covering thousands of sites, anyway) which started within a month of her joining, so it's quite possible.

Remember that initial editor applications should be to categories of the size specified in the guidelines, usually 50-100 sites (including subcategories), and that proposed sites should match both the current description and that of existing sites in the category, if possible. (Proposing a reorganization in your initial editor application, other than possibly proposing a new subcategory which you can populate with 20 or more sites, probably will not be considered.)

Did someone say "major reorganization"?

I'll bring the tequilla, you bring the advil.

differing classifications

this dialogue brings up an issue I've been toying with.

If the goal is to facilitate a person finding what they want, would not creating more subcategories and allowing mutiple listing be a workable idea?

For example, the limitations you are discussion stem from the notion of needing to list a book (or fan site or whatever your were referencing) as EITher Sci-Fi or fanatasy, and the untenabilty of subject is made crucial because of the single listing notion.

I suppose it is the notion of the whole structure of the site, but for an example, I'll mention the private Mutiple Listing Services run by differen boards of realators across the nation. While many have merged there still exist many on rather small levels.

A single family home is listed in that category but it has mutiple fields in which it could be indexed.

Now I'd draw a distinction between Indexing, which is closer to what a directory does, and search, which is a tool which allows for making use of the information.

A good deal of time and effort is spent by the editors of the DMOZ initially looking at pages. It seems to me that the effort intially taken might not be increased by checking a few more boxes of categories to include somthing in.

I guess thats the issue,

Is the DMOZ the libary or the card file? Actully I will start a thread with that question which I think I'd like to hear more clearly from many people seperate from the issue of where to divide subcategories which was the notion of the thread.

Overlapping categories forcing multiple listings is something we see as a problem, not a solution. (Overlapping PARENT categories, on the other hand, is OK: a subcategory can logically exist in two places.)

Overlapping categories forcing multiple listings is something we see as a problem, not a solution.

Clearly, I'd sure like to be able to better understand the history of why that is the case. I surmise it leads to problems, but I'm not entirely able to imagine those. I think the directory vs inex thread I started might be the place.

And again, I'm not looking for an argument. An elaboartion, or a link to debate on the missiion, phasing and emergency measuers would help understanding, I may be missing the purpose, or I may be underrsstimating complications that might result if things were done differently.