Yeah, tags are interesting because they change the card name. And that changes how it’s used and what it means.
I’ve made this point before, but it keeps coming up because I think there’s a desire for it. That is, the ability to attach metadata to cards that indicate that these cards belong to a specific group, which I can name.
- Tags don’t serve this because they change the card contents, so are not solely meta data. Also, visually, they can overbearing because of how they are rendered (text with colored background on every card).
- Card colors don’t serve this because you can’t apply semantics to a color, formally. A blue card over here might be blue for a different reason than a blue card over there, even if they use the same blue. But, visually, they are a great way to indicate a grouping. I think that’s why people are asking for that next level of being able to apply meaning to a color. (Having custom saved colors doesn’t do it for me).
- Connections are really close. You can give connections a name, so that satisfies the semantic piece. However, connections have a start and end, which is extra information that is irrelevant when you simply want to say that these cards belong to the same group. And finally, visually, they are also a bit noisy, and due to the prior point, they don’t visually indicate a group. They indicate connections, as they should.
I’m not saying anything new here, but simply rehashing things within the context of this request. Hopefully it doesn’t muddy up this thread, but I think it’s very related. The reason why people want to save colors for future use is because they want to apply semantics to certain colors. But if you were to implement just an easy way to recall used/saved colors, that doesn’t go the full way.
