Category talk:Folksonomy

Categorization to Category:Web 2.0 neologisms
I've restored this, for three reasons: Andy Dingley (talk) 10:03, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Category membership is there to build useful navigation paths. It's never an ontological definition, and it's a mistake to rely on it as such.
 * Folksonomy as a neologism dates from the web 2.0 era (either 2001 or 2004, depending on whether you credit Vander Wal as its inventor).
 * Folksonomy as a technique relies on the mass collaboration tools that were brought into existence by web 2.0. Although it's no doubt possible to work on a folksonomy without, it restricts the ease of doing so, and particularly the size of the group involved. Card sorting and focus groups pre-date web 2.0, but they are traditionally limited to a roomful of people.