Power edit tags / alphabetize tags

Power edit is back. You can add and remove tags as before.

I've removed the "alphabetize tags" power-edit. Instead, you can go to "edit profile" from your profile, and choose "Always alphabetize your tags." This doesn't actually alphabetize your tags, but they show up alphabetized in your catalog.

Works for me as advertised. Many thanks for restoring this very useful feature.

Hooray, Tim! Thanks for poweredit's return. And, the alphabetize tags option is a great idea.

I feel like a whole person again.

But when you set always alphabetize tags and do a sort by tags in your library view they are still sorted by their original order. I'm not sure if this is a problem or not though, since I don't want my tags sorted alphabetically.

>5 jjwilson61:
Mine are sorted alphabetically.

>5 jjwilson61:

Ah, you're right. Blech. I forgot that. That's harder, weirdly.

Is this a feature people even care about?

Care about tags being alphabetical??

That's how my whole catalog is organized!

8> No, having your tags be sorted alphabetically within the tag field and being able to sort on *that* order (instead of the original order) when sorting on your library.

New tag edit features, AND power edit! Echoing >4 DaynaRT:

Thanks!

>8 DaynaRT:

You want the tags alphabetical for each book?

lol I would never even think of the *possibility* of alphabetizing my tags within each book unless I'd read it here. Definitely isn't of interest to me, although I guess I can see why it could be useful for some.

POWER-EDIT! Yay! Thank you!

>12 timspalding:
Well, yeah. Isn't that what we had before?

Echoing #4
"I feel like a whole person again"

THANKS, THANKS, THANKS!!! for bringing back power edit. Every day I clicked the power edit button at least once to see if it had been reinstated while I was offline. Today (oh me of little faith) I just looked at the power edit button longingly but didn't click on it and went to talk instead to see what was new and lo and behold here we are!

To alphabetize or not to alphabetize is not a question for me. I put tags in the order I want them and unfortunately it has nothing to do with alphabetizing but everything to do with what order I want to see the information lined up. Up to now I haven't found a way to power edit "add a tag" into the middle of an existing tag, just to the end of it. Better than not having power edit at all!

Most of my tag order may have to do with collection type thinking for the first tag I want to see is whether I own it or not and the next tags have to do with which area of study the book would belong to....history, science, time period, etc or which literature guide or curriculum they are used in. The last tags I want to see are location tags or whether I have loaned a book to someone or even wishlist.
I use this same type of system in my other account which includes mostly adult level books and all of the ones I collect or trade on some of the trading sites. First tags are whether I own it or not, then review ratings, time periods or genre, then whether I have traded or are in a pending trade and finally a location for the book (which is usually a box).

I would love to combine these 2 accounts into one account and maybe some of my thinking behind my tagging scheme was to help me identify where those books will go when collections happen. Ever the optimist!!

I may keep them separate since one account reflects mainly childrens books and the other adult... I don't need to make a decision on that until I see what features collections will include.

But now with the new tags page AND power edit I can pack up some of my books for storage...a process I did NOT want to tackle until power edit was back. THANKS again!

PS: In Power edit mode could the number of books displayed be set to the same number as our display styles in catalog view? It is always 100 now which is good when trying to edit a huge number of books but sometimes I only need to edit 20 or 30 at a time and I would rather not check 20 or 30 or even 50 if I don't have to...

Fantastic!

One thing I have noticed, however, is that, while one can still Set language, there does not appear to be a quick way to search your library to determine which of your books remain unset. Perhaps such a feature could be added by: a) installing a set language search (including a "blank" option) under Miscellaneous Powers; or b) listing unset books in the Language of the book/Original language section of the Library statistics page a la tagless books on the tag page: "(no set language)" being the new "(no tag)" setting.

It's not going to be a big deal for most users (I, for example, only have seven books out of one thousand two hundred and sixty two which have no set language), but it would be a practical tool for those who would like to make use of it...

17: Sorting by language or original language doesn't work for you?

Tim:

Thank you! Thank you! @-->->----

Sorting by tag -- as long as my tags "appear" to be in alpha order in catalog view, I'm happy. I've never had occasion to sort by tag for search purposes, just for "I want it alphabetical" purposes.

I'm so happy power edit is back...I could spit :-)

>18 infiniteletters: Ah. Having just tried it, I have to say that it does.

I should have double checked the "edit styles" page before I made my suggestion!

Hooray! \o/

My life is now complete :).

Like most people, I put my tags in the order I want them, so the current setup WRT the alpha-sort option won't bother me a bit. I could see it causing some people problems, however, depending on how you (Tim and the rest of the LT staff) have programmed things. Suppose that someone (User A) has their tags sorted like most of the above, i.e. manually in whatever order they want. User A decides he wants to look at his pretty tags alphabetized, and isn't worried, since the column will still sort by their personal order. What happens when User A adds a new tag to a book that already has them? What is the new tag order? Does it depend on where in the old list of tags the new one is placed? How this is handled will depend on how you've programmed it, but I can't see any way that this could work out happily, and you just know this will happen, if it hasn't already.

Again, this is just me looking out for poor User A, since I won't be using the alpha-display option.

>12 timspalding:

Well, I couldn't tell if you meant seeing a list of your tags in alphabetical order, or a feature to force your tags to go alphabetical within each book.

Ideally, I'd rather have this be a *mode* of viewing. Making it so users have to remember to do it is a pain—and the rejiggering of tags is not cheap on the database, if done constantly. Having a feature that knows to alphabetize your tags whenver you change them is better, but fiddly. So, my solution is to *show* them alphabetized.

That, however, is easier said than done.

It seems sorta bizarre to me. What happens when you edit them? Wait, I'll do a quick check.

ETA: It shows it to you in the alphabetized order, not what I expected.

My limited UI design knowledge tells me that if you display it in a certain order then all the operations you do on it should be in that order. However, I have no dog in this fight so I'm going to bow out at this point.

As long as I can see my books in alphabetical order, by tag, I'll be happy.

I liked being able to alphabetize tags for each book, or for a bunch of books through power edit. I'd be fine with a setting that would let me opt to auto alphabetize. Actually, I'd be delighted with this as a perfect solution!

My tags are set such that if I alphabetize my tags for each book (which can be easily redone if editing mixes them, thanks to power edit), then due to the way I named the tags, the books are a "timeline" of sorts, chronological by either the era to which they pertain (if history), or the era in which they were written (if literature).

By clicking on "tags" at the top of my profile, it was as though one "view" of my library was a timeline of books.

I think the idea mentioned in message 12 would accomplish this for me.

All that said, I think my organizational system is unique and quirky, so I sure don't think we need this feature "just for me". Go with what works best everything considered.

>25 DaynaRT:

Okay you mean a list of your books, ordered by the first tag they have, right? NOT that you want the tags on a book to be internally alphabetical, right?

Sorry, we keep missing each other on this, or at least I think we are.

I guess I don't understand what Power Edit is. What does it do? I edit each book as I enter it into my LT catalog. Is Power Edit a better way of editing my books? Am I missing out on something wonderful? Someone, please explain this popular tool to me...I like cool tools!

Hey, it's a way of selecting a bunch of books and doing stuff to them—adding tags, for example. There's a button for it in your library when you're in "list" mode.

>29 timspalding:
Yes, I've always noticed the button, but never tested it. However, isn't adding tags about the only thing that Power Edit would be good for...since basically all of the other info for seperate books would be different. I mean, you can't use power edit for publication info, LoC numbers, DDC numbers, or any of that stuff. It would all have to be entered in the normal Edit Book page, right? So by doing a book at a time, I'm not really missing out on something vital to my catalog? If Power Edit is just a time saver, then I can do without. Much of my joy in life comes from the hours spent on LT...I'd hate to shorten that time with a time-saving tool :)

Yeah, at present it only does tags, deletes and, I think, languages.

#30 basically if you suddenly decide that 100 books in your catalog need a new tag, you can add it at once, saving a lot of typing/clicking of repetative information. The key with Power edit is that you can select a subsection of a given search return to add the tag to, rather than the tag page where you can only add another tag to all books.

TIM: This seems to have broken Tag Sorting. If I search for my author tag .CJC and sort the results by tag for the first few books the order appears as

.CJC, /ali11
.CJC, /bre09
.CJC, fantasy
.CJC, /tri5
.CJC, fantasy
.CJC, /bre07

this is very wrong. The 27 books should be ordered by their series tags, 3with /alix followed by 9 with /bre0x etc etc.

ordered by the first tag they have

Exactly. This helps me with listing my books in order of physical location, and in series order.

I don't understand the question about alphabetizing tags, or somehow I'm misreading something.

Currently, each books' tags are in the order that I entered them, not alphabetical. This is the way I prefer it, as I have come up with my own hierarchical tag system and would be deeply disappointed if suddenly the tags on each individual book were alphabetized.

Or is it being suggested that the books listed by tag be alphabetized when searching a tag or when clicking on the tag column in the catalog? If so, okay, although I'm pretty sure that's the way it works now. And if it doesn't, the ability to do a primary and secondary sort would certainly allow it.

Or is something else being suggested? I've read this thread twice and I'm still not sure.

Thanks for helping out the lady whose head is clogged with seasonal allergy junk rather than actual thoughts.

Edited for clarity

I want to view my tags alphabetically, and have been using power edit to do that in batches right from the start. It may be because I use a lot of tags, on average. I don't sort my catalog on that field, but when I do a search, it helps that I can see other tags displayed logically (to me ;-). A default that would automatically display them alphabetical is just dandy with me.

34: As I understand it, each book's tags will be as you entered them, unless you go into your profile and choose "Always alphabetize your tags." This will make the tags for each book appear in alphabetical order. You don't want that, neither do I, but some people do.

This is completely separate from sorting your catalog by the tags, which you can achieve by clicking on the Tags column in the catalog.

I think people are confusing the two throughout this thread, and hence confusing each other.

Alphabetize tags option on profile = sort the list of tags for each book
(e.g. "cumbria, england, history, non-fiction" instead of "non-fiction, history, england, cumbria)

Click Tags header in catalog = sort books by tags
(e.g. books whose first tag is "anger management" will appear before books whose first tag is "happy happy joy joy")

36> Correct, but just to clarify your last point,

(e.g. books whose first tag is "anger management" will appear before books whose first tag is "happy happy joy joy")

Only if "anger management" was the first tag as you entered it. If it's only the first tag because you checked Always alphabetize your tags on your profile page and "textbook" was the first tag when you entered it, it will sort after "happy happy joy joy".

More to the point, if you add "anger management" to a bunch of your books through power edit, power edit puts that tag at the end, so even though it will look like that is your first tag, it won't sort in your library view that way.

And as in my #32 sorting by clicking on the tag header seems to be broken, or at least not working in all cases. These are not alphabetized tags, and weren't added through PE.

36/37> Thank you for the explanation. As long as it's an option, then I'm fine with it. Or until we get collections, after which I will be able to organize my library differently. Until then, though, I prefer my own tag system without alphabetization.

Tim, I think it would be a good idea to turn off the ability to sort by the tag column when tag alphabetization is selected for a user. It doesn't really make sense and if you allow it, I foresee a lot of confusion and explanations in the future.

I keep my tags alphabetized, but I still find sorting by tags useful (at least when it is working, which it isn't at the moment). So, I would hate to have that turned off for me!

turn off the ability to sort by the tag column when tag alphabetization is selected for a user

Yeah, please don't do this.

Do you realize that it won't sort by the tags as you see them (alphabetized) but by how you originally entered them? Is that still useful to you?

Quite aware of that, and yes.

43>Do you realize that it won't sort by the tags as you see them (alphabetized) but by how you originally entered them? Is that still useful to you?

Really? I didn't know that. Thanks. However, I generally try to keep myself alphabetized from the beginning. So, it would still be useful for me, yes.

>40 jjwilson61:

If I'm understanding right, I disagree.

Ignore if it creates extra work, but I personally enjoy having both tag alphabetization and the ability to sort by the tag column, and think they are especially useful when used together.

I specifically named my tags so that if my tags are alphabetical and they are sorted by tags by clicking on the tag column, my books arrange themselves more of less chronologically by the era associated with the literature. I love being able to sort the whole library by tags as a library view so I can page through my catalog by from ancient egypt up to the present day. (Those I have yet to tag float to the top, but I hope to have them all tagged soon.)

I even suggest in my profile that those browsing my library click to sort my list by clicking on the tag column, and the tagging order is so easily maintained due to the fantastic tag alphabetization freature.

Obviously if this option bogs down the LT community at large, or creates extra work, I'm entirely fine with not having my own preference. (Especially if not many others use such a quirky sorting method.)

Edited:
>43 jjwilson61:: I didn't know that... But like 45 I do still think it is useful. I try to keep myself alphabetized from the onset too...

But if you keep your tags in alphabetical order from the onset then you don't need to select the Always Alphabetize box in your profile as you're already doing it manually. And if there is a case where you accidentally got the tags in the wrong order and LT puts it in the right order for you, then it won't sort right in that one case. Isn't that confusing?

>47 jjwilson61:, Very valid point, and yes, it will be a tad confusing to have books that slip thorough. Ideally I'd love for the Always Alphabetize feature it to really reorder the tags alphabetically in a way that sticks when I sort by tags. But I'd rather have the occasional blip book that doesn't stay in order than not have the options at all.

Well, if you do spot such a book that isn't sorting right, just edit and save the tags without changing anything and that should save it into the record in the sorted order.

I can’t remember the thread or poster but I came across a discussion on tag sorting. This poster explained listing tags in hierarchal order for improved sorting.

I was so excited I went directly to my library and started redoing my tags. What a trip! Only did the dictionaries and poetry but talk about organization. I must find the poster and go on hands and knees with thanks. I can’t understand why anyone would want to alphabetize for reasons other than appearance. Am I missing something? What’s the functionality?

>50 muzzie: I can’t understand why anyone would want to alphabetize for reasons other than appearance. Am I missing something? What’s the functionality?

I alphabetize for aesthetic reasons for sure, but also because I use quite a few tags (I think my profile says an average of 5 per book). Having them alphabetical scans better for me visually. I can more easily tell at a glance if a certain book has a particular tag. And if I am doing a search on a tag, it is visually easier for me to pick out subgroupings without having to do sophisticated search commands that I never can remember how to set up ;-)

Obviously, one's MMV on a subject like this. Or should I say the flavor of our OCD will vary :-)

Now that I (think) I understand, I'm not thrilled with the new approach. I want my tags to BE in alpha order, not APPEAR in alpha order, because I do want my tags to be in alpha order when I sort by tag.

Yes, I realize that if I originally put them in alpha order when I enter them, they will be in alpha order always. However, when I have only a few books in a particular area of interest, I don't put as fine a point on my tags (fewer books in a subject means fewer tags on those books). As my collection grows, I add tags in order to differentiate the books within the subject from each other. Doing this with power edit will put the new tag at the end of the list. Also, I frequently buy large numbers of books --several dozen-- at once, and I simply tag them "2bTagged" and one or two "starter" tags. I go in later and add tags with Power Edit. In both of these situations, if I wanted the later tags to sort alphabetically, I'd have to ALWAYS enter them by hand. Yucky.

edited to add: Sorry for being so long winded, but it seems to be useful to be quite specific about how one uses various features, so... I actually DO NOT enter my tags alphabetically, which is why it is important for me to be able to Power Edit tags into alpha order. When I enter tags, I go through a process -- *Is it fiction or non? Tag. If fiction, what genre? Tag. Is it in a series? Tag. If non fiction, what subject? Tag. What areas within the main subject? Tag.* This is kind of how it goes. If I don't use this process, I will miss tags. I'm really happy for folks who think alphabetically or who have a the time to type and then cut and paste their tags into alpha order, but I'm neither of those types of people...I need the Power Edit Alphabetize Tags feature back...

Of course, the possibility STILL exists that I have no idea what I'm talking about and have completely misunderstood how this new do-hicky works. ;-)

50>Why alpha? My answer is a question...Why hierarchical? Hierarchical, to me, goes against the grain of tagging -- it is cumbersome and requires knowledge of the hierarchical structure in order to navigate through the data. It isn't fluid or flexible. It's "old school" organization, like a Windows operating system file structure.

I do have some subjects (like psych) with semi-hierarchical tags (psych:med, psych:cog, psych:adhd, for example), but I find an alpha list of fluid tags most useful. I agree with the reasons in post 51 -- it's easy to see if I'm missing tags, if a book has a particular tag, and to visually catch sub-groupings.

@ 50 - I dunno if I was the person you were referring to, but I posted about hierarchical tags recently.

I would hate to alphabetize my tags. I went through and redid them for every book so that they are in the hierarchy that I prefer. For example, I would have a book tagged "fiction, historical fiction, 16th century, England" which would show up after the book tagged "fiction,historical fiction, 6th century, Italy" and before the book tagged "fiction, historical fiction, 16th century, Scotland".

My system makes sense to me - I don't find it cumbersome and it's very easy to navigate through the data. It's not meant to be fluid or flexible - I can sort other ways for that. And since I am the person that it needs to make sense to, it works for me.

Was you. Found other thread. " Tags - Wouldn't it be great if ....."

Really helps, I like order. I know if I need something, the tag listing allows me to select, but the grouping makes availability much clearer. I started with LT because I could never find a book or know what I had. Thanks

>52 pdxwoman: Why alpha? My answer is a question...Why hierarchical?

Why not? I've had a hierarchical system since I joined LT back in 2007. With LT, people can organize their library however they like. That way I can use what makes sense to me, and others can do what makes sense for them. Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think humans like a little self-imposed order. Otherwise, we wouldn't even care about alphabetization.

". . . it is cumbersome and requires knowledge of the hierarchical structure in order to navigate through the data. It isn't fluid or flexible.

Well, not really. Hierarchical tags utilize all the great LT features just as easily and well as alphabetical tags. You can search "fiction" and "20th century" regardless of the order of the tags in a person's library. Someone can get book recommendations based on "cooking" no matter where it is in the tag string. Plus, if you think about it, alphabetization is a kind of imposed system - it's just based on a different and more widely-known construct. ;)

The beauty of LT is that it is not either/or, it's "and." How wonderful. There's no reason to choose - the system lets people do what they like.

Edited for niceness. Really, I'm not usually as crabby as my original post sounded.

52 was just responding to a question poised by 50. There's no reason to work up a lather over it.

>56 jjwilson61: Yes, you're right. Although s/he never really answered #50's question. I'll edit my post to be nicer - no need to take out my early-morning crabbiness on a fellow LTer.

@ 55 - The beauty of LT is that it is not either/or, it's "and." How wonderful. There's no reason to choose - the system lets people do what they like.

Exactly. That's one of the (many) reasons I paid for two lifetime memberships my first day of discovering this site. I think it's just so fantastic. :)

55: The beauty of LT is that it is not either/or, it's 'and.' How wonderful. There's no reason to choose - the system lets people do what they like." Thank you for making the point I failed to make. I did not realize that my presentation of my preference, and reasons for disliking hierarchical tagging, would come across as an indication that my way was the right way *for everyone*. It's certainly the right way for me, and so I'm not thrilled with the "fake" alpha sort, but if people prefer hierarchical tags, more power to them! :-)

I'm very sorry that it's currently only allowing you to see your tags in alphabetical order, not to sort by them that way. In fact, I'm in some doubt how to proceed insofar as true alphabetical sorting is--given the particular database structure--rather harder to pull off, particularly for the hundred-thousand tag people.

Right now I'm focused on the largest problems with this site. This is somewhat down the list, but clearly still important.

I've always taken an organic approach to my tags. So, a lot of the argument has sailed over my head. If I come across a book that I put in over a year ago and it has only three tags, I may take a look at what the most common tagging this book has in LT and choose 1 or 2 or 3 to tack on to my tags. If I don't like how others have tagged the book, I may take a look at the subject heading this book has to see if there is an interesting thing I've missed about the book.

The new tag list makes it easier to see if I have mispelled tags, or there are inconsistencies that I can't live with.

60> Tim -- There are only so many hours in a day and only so many people you can make ecstatic at one time. I think you do an incredible amount with your hours, and you do a much better job than me at making lots of people ecstatic... Thanks for all your work on LT! :-)

First of all, don't click to sort tags alphabetically in your profile, that only affects the displayed order of your tags within each book. Second, are you making the date tag the first tag in the tag list for each book?

Found this SUPER old thread. Seems this feature is no longer available in Profile Settings? I'm trying to add the century to all of my history books (lots of those) and sorting by tags would make this easier, but I need them alphabetized first. Am I missing how to do this?

#1 by @timspalding> maybe I haven't had enough caffeine this morning, but I can't find the 'alphabetize tags' option anywhere.

Oh, 'Alphabetize Tags' no help to me, I'm afraid, as my tags are in a strict order (condition, class-tag, class-tag*, author=###+, classics+, location+, ex-lib+).

66: Tags no longer alphabetize in the tag area of a particular record.

You can see a list of all your tags alphabetized by using the tag selection under the tabs.

There is an edit choice on this page that allows you to fix mis-spellings and change one tag to another. You can also search by specific tag in Your Library and use Power Edit to add or remove tags.

If you use power edit to change tags, you have to add the new tag first and then delete the old one.

No, I mean I need them alphabetized within the book records themselves - not on the Tags page. This used to be a feature of Power Edit, but that was long ago. Hoping I can still do this somehow.

http://www.librarything.com/topic/87525
http://www.librarything.com/topic/99560
http://www.librarything.com/topic/140896

Thanks for the info, MarthaJeanne. Wish the news was different.

What is the reason you need them a-z?

>73 JerryMmm: Two reasons for me: 1) aesthetics, and 2) wanting tags with special characters to be either at the beginning or end (which, of course, depends upon the character used).

Oh, I can see usecases. I'm just wondering for >66 sergerca: use, if that really is the best way to solve the problem.

I can't see where the alphabetize tags options is. I went to edit your profile, but I just don't see it. Help?

Look in the links I posted at >71 MarthaJeanne:. It hasn't been working for years, and the checkbox was removed by August 2012.

Alas. But yes.

It's partly aesthetic, and partly because I have 1400 books in my library and I'm trying to clean things up (eg. reviewing wishlist items, more precisely categorizing, etc.) Search is able to help a lot, but I miss this old feature.

>77 MarthaJeanne: But in profile, there is no miscellaneous anymore. I just don't see it. Can someone explain?
I still don't se how to alphabetize my tags.

>80 al.vick: You can no longer alphabetize your tags, except manually. The option no longer exists.

However, when I go to YOUR BOOKS, view the listing, then click on TAGS, the tags ARE alphabetized.

Yes, the tags on the tag page where you see all of the tags for a collection are alphabetized.

There used to be an option to have the tags on each book show in alphabetical order. This topic from 2008 talks about a change in how that was implemented. However the option no longer exists. Now the tags show the way you entered them. If you want them in alphabetical order you have to do it manually for each book.

ah....thanks...

It WOULD be nice to have them showing on each book page in alpha order....

Okay, I was misunderstanding since I hadn't read this thread before, and the first message looked new.
I was hoping Tim had brought that feature back, but alas. No. Not yet.

Thanks for clearing me up!