Sun, 05 Apr 2026 01:15:15 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7269 Replace categories and groups with tags I had a wacky idea the other day: what if we replaced both the category field, and the Turba_Group stuff (which is kind of wonky) with tags? You could treat any tag as a group, and use that for mail within IMP or wherever also. In addition, if we could pass along the color information for tags to apps using autocompletion, you could see your tag's color show up in the IMP address input even. Sun, 31 Aug 2008 04:59:00 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7269#t48620 I think the replacing category with tags is a great idea, but I'm not so sure about using tags as a replacement for contact groups. My first thought is that this would make it extremely difficult to keep sources that are not exclusive to Horde in sync with changes made to groups in Horde....and how would we map them the other way? i.e. If an external address book source already have groups defined? I'm also wondering about how resource intensive it would be to make the queries that would be needed to know what "groups" should be visible when browsing an address book etc... Unless you are talking about _completely_ changing how they are displayed in Turba, and not showing groups when browsing address books, and instead having each tag represent a single group across all sources...in which case I think that this would be counter intuitive to how most people use address books. Of course, just my opinion, and I could be totally missing the point here :) Sun, 31 Aug 2008 13:30:57 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7269#t48622 It's already possible to have groups with contacts from different sources, if I'm not wrong, so that argument is moot. I share the concerns with external sources though. OTOH, the groups could probably be mapped to the tags attributes in these cases. Sun, 31 Aug 2008 16:49:43 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7269#t48624 > It's already possible to have groups with contacts from different > sources, if I'm not wrong, so that argument is moot. I share the > concerns with external sources though. OTOH, the groups could > probably be mapped to the tags attributes in these cases. Yes, but if we replace the current contact group implementation with tags, we won't be able to add contacts from one source to a group within another without some trickery with the tags - like appending the source key to the tag. Again, unless I'm missing something which is entirely possible. :) The other concern isn't so much contacts from different sources but knowing exactly which groups/tags a particular source contains. My thought process is: Individual contacts are tagged, placing them in a "group". When you browse an individual address book source, to know what "groups" to display in that source we would need an additional query to the tag table/backend to find out which contacts in the current address book are tagged with what. Another thought, what would happen if you have PERMS_READ on a source, but want to include a contact from that source in one of your groups? You would need to tag that contact, but don't have access to. Another issue is how to deal with sources that multiple people have PERMS_EDIT on. Tags would have to be per user, since I may not want a contact in the same group that someone else with access to that contact does. Again, just my observations, and I may be missing something here.. Sun, 31 Aug 2008 17:36:58 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7269#t48629 Having tags per-user is something we might need to address anyway with really shared content - I'll add a note to the horde_content stuff about it. Regardless, I think this idea is less attractive after explanation than it initially was in my head. So I'm rejecting it for now. Obviously just having tags in turba is another matter but also far less complicated. Thu, 04 Sep 2008 02:32:17 +0000 https://bugs.horde.org/ticket/7269#t48699