Re: Assigning tags to groups

On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 12:22:55 +0100, Tobias Leupold wrote:
>> 2) More seriously, if you assign a tag to a group, and that tag is
>> already under another group, that relationship is not removed,
>> breaking the hierarchical relationship.
>
> I think it's intended that a tag can't only be member of one group, but of
> multiple ones. E. g. "Esbjerg" can be part of "Denmark" as well as of "Party
> Locations".
>
> IIRC, the original relationship display was groups on the left and members on
> the right side, and each tag could/can be a member of each group. I thought a
> tree view was better, as nested groups were possible but the display could not
> show them. And thus, I wrote an algorithm translating the parent-child
> relatinship to a tree view.
>
> That was quite some time ago, so I'm not sure if I implemented it correctly
> back then (but I hope so!). But imo, definitely, it must be possible for a tag
> to be member of multiple groups.

The annotation dialog shows it as a tree.  One can drag and drop tags
around in that tree, but that's a move, not a copy.  So either way, it
needs to be consistent.

I'd like it to not have to be a tree myself, for my sports shooting,
which I'd like to arrange by season as well as gender.  I guess I
could create a new category (or categories) for that purpose, though.
-- 
Robert Krawitz                                     <rlk-FrUbXkNCsVf2fBVCVOL8/[email protected]>

***  MIT Engineers   A Proud Tradition   http://mitathletics.com  ***
Member of the League for Programming Freedom  --  http://ProgFree.org
Project lead for Gutenprint   --    http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton