Re: channel classification

["Mark Nottingham" <mnot@xxxxx.xxxx]

> I have put my money where my mouth is and converted xmlTree to run on the
Dewey
> classification.  There is a reasonable spread of xml content across the
categorisation
> structure - some lumpiness does occur (i.e. 605 Technical journals, into
which I have put
> a whole load of technically-oriented but not computer specific weblogs).
Partly this is
> due to my lack of experience with the Dewey System, and this will improve
over time.

James, that is *so* cool!
I didn't mean to say that Dewey will be unusable. I think that Carmen's got
it; we need to consider classification of the channel and the content
separately. Perhaps the kinds of classification available could be:

1 channel-level central classification (Dewey/whatever) - required?
2 item-level central classification (Dewey/whatever) -or (both optional)-
3 item-level domain classification (with URL to XML doc of classification
system)

On a practical level, not many sites are going to be able/willing to Dewey
classify every piece of content they produce. This will allow those that do
have current systems to use them.