Implementing group tags in Logseq in the style of org-mode

[Matthieu_B]

We need a way to specifiy group tags in Logseq in the style of org-mode: Tag Hierarchy (The Org Manual)

You should be able to organize tags/pages into multiple group tags to allow for all sorts of abstractions and top-down filtering. For example, #cat can be grouped under #animal but also under #fluffy_things. #Rossin under #composer but also under #cook. Both #composer and #cook would go under #person and so on. It is sort of like the tag inheritance feature in the outliner, but not limited to the context in which notes were captured. We should be able to define these taxonomies independently from the experience of capturing and processing notes so that they apply accross the board and allow for intuitive filtering in the future without the use of advanced queries. They would also need to reflect in the tag pane of the Linked references filtering section (as they are inherited).

I can imagine a built-in page-property “parent(s)::” allowing the user to specify these relations once and for all in order to retrieve useful information through filtering and Boolean operators.

[gax]

I think this is very important! There are already a bunch of feature requests on this topic

High level:

Knowledge Management for Tags / Tag Hierarchies

Why do we need Knowledge Management for Tags? Graphs will quickly have far too many tags We need a way to organize and browse tags The Problem Tagging leads to a large number of unrelated tags (thousands) without any structure Browsing these tags through a list, graph, or tag cloud, is not very efficient As shown in another thread by @ChrisYT and @Zdenek_Hurak items imported from other systems (e.g. Zotero) have many overlapping tags, such as “History, 20th Century”, “history”, “History / …

Discussion:

Would a rich commitment to hierarchies and classification be an anathema to Logseq culture?

First of all, I’d like to thank the adventurous team at Logseq for committing to the endless and sometimes thankless work of building a new software platform from scratch. I really appreciate what this tool is, and am excited for what it may yet become. I’d also like to thank the company and key influencers in the Logseq community for not being entirely hostile to the idea of hierarchy in information organization. For many of us, hierarchy is a natural way to construct access paths into our gra…

And one way to implement hierarchical searches along properties and display them as a tree:

Specify and display relations between pages/tags

Premise Following the discussion here I think I have a viable and concise proposal to address most use cases of the “hierarchically organize pages/tags”. The point is specifying hierarchies using page properties. For me the ideal would some syntax that, given an arbitrary user-defined <property>, (for example extends::), looks like this: Specify relations between pages Parent.md <property>:: [[Child]] Child.md <property>:: [[Teddy]] Display these relations Tree {{tree <p…

[Matthieu_B]

Hello gax,

Thank you for your exhaustive reply I did not realise how popular that feature request was already! To me it seems painfully obvious. I can’t really function without an ontology (hierarchical ordering of concepts). MOCs are nice for getting you around but not powerful enough to summon a few relevant blocks on the spot with Boolean operators.

Do you happen to know another app that offers polyhierarchy of pages/topics? I’m looking into org-mode at the moment although I suspect I’m not getting a Logseq’s dynamic tag pane to help me narrow down my search into existing tag combinations instead of aiming in the dark. Both these features combined would be a killer second brain experience.

[gax]

Hi Matthieu,

I wish the request was more popular, because to me it is also painfully obvious!
At the moment, Logseq is more of a write-once, read never, notataking system.

Other than org-mode I am not sure which system has proper tag hierarchies, but I am sure many of them do, given that this is such a basic idea. A couple people in the threads gave up and moved on to other systems that do, unfortunately I don’t remember which.

Alex0 has been in touch with the developers and his proposal for a basic tree search seems to have gained traction, he mentioned that it would be one of the next items they’d work on. This thread has more info, it also has a diagram how it would all work.

It is not a big project, all we need is a tree search command, the UI probably can already render the output. Ultimately we’ll need some tools to efficiently organize tags, but worst case this can be done with an external script.