High-level outline: This is a tale of Order falling into Disorder and what Chandler is going to do about it.

1. A brief overview of the 2 and 1/2 organizational systems we will look at: Hierarchies, Faceted systems, Tagsonomies
   • refer to the high level definitions: draw on the board.
2. Why do people organize? What are their organizational needs? Why is it important to ask this question?
   1. Provide a high level narrative of the scope and shape of their stuff
   2. Provide a guided navigation system to explore a particular topic
   3. Provide means for targeted search and retrieval of individual items
   4. Provide a way to explore content
   5. Gather stuff into containers for the sake of gathering the stuff in a container (ie. Playlist)
   6. Providing easy access to the stuff you need to get at often (ie. Favorites)
   7. Attach semantics to data

1. How Hierarchies are good at meeting some organizational needs: Telling the Story of our Lives and a Guided Navigation experience
   • Chunked Chunks: fewer items to deal with: DDC.png example
   • Enhanced by filled-out spectrums
   • Prioritize Chunks into a linear story
   • Here is a wizard: step by step of how to reach your goal: Getting dressed v. Finding shorts
   • Closet hierarchy: how it meets everyone of these criteria
2. How Hierarchies are horrible at meeting other organizational needs: Targeted search and retrieval, Favorites and Storing semantic data
   • Can't switch between different tasks easily: Getting dressed v. Finding shorts
   • Can't put Favorites on top: fixed structure
   • Can't move items around: Closet-Laundry and Katie example
3. How trying to use Hierarchies as a one size fits all makes Hierarchies unusable for all organizational needs
   • Outlook.png example
   • Generalities.png example: what are the most comprehensible portions of this branch?

1. How Faceted systems are good at meeting some organizational needs: Targeted search and retrieval, Storing semantic data
   • x-y-z rotation is flexible
   • Unique thumbprint: Easier to identify someone with a unique-ish set of facets than wandering through a big tree, looking for the right location
   • Iterative, guided navigation, like search clustering
2. How Faceted systems are not as good at meeting other organizational needs: Telling the Story of our Lives and a Guided Navigation experience
   • x-y-z rotation is confusing
   • There's chunking of attribute values (tags and labels) into attribute value types (attributes or facets)
   • There's even potential for well-designed facets with spectrums that are filled out end-to-end and presented in a semantically meaninful order: Sunday through Saturday
   • But there's no prioritization of the facets into a linear narrative: Which facets come first? Which facets are more important? more enduring? larger than life?
   • As a result, because Faceted systems are great at rearranging themselves in every which way to accomplish multifarious tasks, they also shift the burden of figuring out which organization of facets is optimized for which task.
3. How Faceted systems are hard to use: A pain in the butt to add metadata and Hard for laypeople to design well
   • Bad workflows and Bad interaction make for painful metadata entry experiences
   • Katie's 0.6 planning project as an example of how it's hard to design facets well

1. How as a result Faceted systems ultimately disintegrate into Tagsonomies
2. How Tagsonomies are overwhelming and fail to meet most organizational needs
   • Losing depth means Losing chunking
   • Tags multiply like rabbits
   • So items looks like they're multiplying like rabbits
   • No sense of place due to lack of visualization UIs for Tagsonomies