1. David on November 2, 2006 6:33 PM writes...

I think you have it right.
Tagging is a process that is part of folksonomy but not the other way around. Tagging can stand by itself, but folksonomy cannot exist without tagging.

Folksonomy is a tag-based metadata system whereby the tags used by users are ...
1) aggregated
2) anyone can tag anyone else's content

Basically, Folksonomy is social tagging, IMHO.

2. Liz Lawley on November 2, 2006 6:51 PM writes...

But that would mean that a group of tags created by one user doesn't constitute a folksonomy, and I'm not sure if that holds up. Is my personal tag cloud on Flickr or del.icio.us a folksonomy? Are the tags I add to my Zotero bookmarks a folksonomy?

3. Matthew Hurst on November 2, 2006 7:09 PM writes...

To be totally accurate, I think you need to say

- tagging is the process of associating terms with an item without the constraint of a controlled vocabulary.

What is the difference? Firstly, removal of the 'descriptive' term. This is due to the fact that, like any content, tagging has evolved to be in part an optimization channel to ensure that your 'item' gets indexed and discovered. This is why people tag an item with 'tag, tags, tagging, tagged' - the redundant tags aren't providing any additional descriptive power.

Secondly, I think it is more accurate to state that tags are associated with the item, not added to the item. Ironically, the way in which blog search engines often include tags is actually in the free text, but the intent is one of association.

4. Liz Lawley on November 2, 2006 7:18 PM writes...

Oh, good points! Thank you.

5. Alexa on November 3, 2006 5:18 AM writes...

> tagging is the process of associating terms with an >item without the constraint of a controlled >vocabulary.

I would disagree with this statement. You can tag items with terms from a controlled vocabulary... Tagging is the process, and then you have a choice whether to go for folks- or tax- approach.

6. Luistxo Fernandez on November 3, 2006 6:34 AM writes...

Matthew Hurst's insights is good. As for Alexa, you can tag (=categorize) from a controlled vocabulary... but the result of that tagging-categorization, would we call it folksonomy? I would say no.

Regarding the additional musings in the update: folksonomy as an aggregation can go in different directions, I think. A single item tagged by many different users gives you interesting information in del.icio.us... In other environements, different items tagged by different people can be mixed if another factor is used, for example, Geographic position. At Tagzania we tag places, then we can sort-of calculate a geographic folksonomy. Look at the Nearest Tags section in this location, http://www.tagzania.com/item/1815

Tokyo and Japan appear prominently as most the most prominent near tags defining truly were's that place... In this case, aggregation creates a folksonomy not for a set of items, but more broadly, a folksonomy that defines an area... The user tagged that "Ark-Web place" with his/her own tags not choosing Tokyo or Japan (probably, those were superfluous to him/her; the others have more meaning, which I, of course, don't understand at first sight); however, aggregation and folksonomy from tags applied to OTHER (!) items give us additional data about that particular place where this thing called Ark-Web lies.

7. Bruce Mason on November 3, 2006 7:39 AM writes...

Interesting question. I'm new to this field and have just started blogging about it (http://www.hum.dmu.ac.uk/blogs/tnn/2006/11/whens_a_tag_a_tag.html).

I think the key issue is that "folk" itself is a complex and sometimes contentious term. I've gone into more detail in the blog entry I linked but my stance is that folk is often used as both an adjective (folk art etc) and a noun ("the folk"). I think it's perfectly viable to see tagging as a folk activity - it's a way for an individual to label items - and to conceive of that individual's "personal folksonomy" as well as a broader folksonomy which aggregates all of these folksonomies. This latter process is really quite fascinating and potentially controversial. For example, will we start seeing folksonomy sites for particular groups (ethnic, religious, national, ideological etc) as a way to create specific folksonomies?