Cross-Referencing

1. 85

   DzyMsLizzyposted 11 years ago

   It would be useful to be able to duplicate titles when assigning them to our 'groups.'  Often, there is a crossover between two topics, such as with my "Driving Safely; Traveling With Pets."
   It fits equally well into my Cars/Driving/Maintenance group, as well as my Animal Friends group, where it is currently placed.
   As of now, it is the other pet-related hubs that are shown at the end of the article, (which is fine, as far as it goes,)  but it would be desirable if other 'safe driving' hubs were also shown. 
   Being able to cross-reference our hubs in this manner would add exposure to more hubs, and be beneficial, traffic wise, for all concerned, including Hub Pages itself.
   Thanks for taking this under consideration.

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Sally's Troveposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      A+
      
      Cross-referencing is the backbone of indexing systems (which have been around for a lot longer than the web). Cross-referencing is vital, because, as you say, there are multiple ways of looking at an item in terms of the group/topic it can belong to.
      
      I think googly is addressing this well (no matter how painful the P animal changes have been to so many of us), but HP is lacking, especially with the new profile changes where you can no longer search for keywords within a hubber's body of work.
      
      To be able to list a hub in two or more categories would be smart. A lot smarter than trying to add new categories to cover every possibility.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         DzyMsLizzyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Thanks Sally for your support of this idea.
           I already have quite a few groups/categories.  To attempt to fit each article into its own category would soon become quite ridiculous; you'd end up with each article in it's own group, and you still would not have addressed the crossover issue.

         replyreport
2. 74

   WriteAngledposted 11 years ago

   Kudos to Ranganathan (inventor of the faceted classification) and author of one of my favourite quotations:
   
   "There is no greater authorial sin than releasing a book without an index. It should even be made an indictable offense."
   SR Ranganathan, 1892-1972
   
   Unfortunately, the concept of a properly ordered and usable classification, together with many other concepts from the pioneers of librarianship/information studies, is totally foreign to the semi-literate (if not fully illiterate) approach to the Web that is found today.
   
   I am seriously considering setting up an external web site with a properly categorised and classified listing of my hubs. It seems even more necessary with the Pinterest-style obscenity that will shortly be forced onto all our profiles.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      DzyMsLizzyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Gasp!  Do you mean to imply that we are no longer going to be able to block or opt-out of having our hubs "pinned?"  I don't like one single thing I've heard about Pinterest, vis-a-vis copyright protections...or rather, lack thereof!

      replyreport
      1. 78

         Sally's Troveposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I can't speak for WriteAngled, but I think what she's getting after is that HP is going to look like Pinterest, which it is very close to doing with the new profile layout.

         replyreport
   2. 78

      Sally's Troveposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I think others have done that for their own hubs, but I can't tell you who, just because I don't remember. Whatever it was, I saw it a long time ago, where hub authors made categorized lists of their hubs on external sites. Most now use the RSS feed, but that doesn't categorize hubs by readers' interest.
      
      You could have a money-making thing with this.

      replyreport
3. 85

   DzyMsLizzyposted 11 years ago

   Oh.  Well, I wouldn't know.  After what I read about them, I declined to visit the site.

   replyreport