[wp-hackers] hierarchical custom taxonomies vs good & old cats.

[Otto]

Continuing:

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Haluk Karamete
<halukkaramete at gmail.com> wrote:
> "obama", "blair" and tons of many others can easily be grouped as
> "politicians", thus the need for "politicians" as a group, as a
> category.  ( And this satisfies your point 1 )

But categories don't apply to those, because they are not posts.

Terms in taxonomies actually get applied to posts, not to other terms.
So yes, you can define obama and blair as being in a group, but the
way you group terms is by wrapping a taxonomy around them. Not
wrapping them up inside another term.

> Wouldn't it be nice & easy for both the developers and the site
> visitors to pull something like the following?
>
> <b>People: </b>
> <a href='get all the politicians posts under the people
> taxonomy'>Politicians</a<>,
> <a href='get all the obama posts under the people taxonomy'>obama</a>"

No, that wouldn't make any sense, because your taxonomy is too broad.
This makes more sense:

<b>People: </b>
<a href='get all the politicians posts under the people-group
taxonomy'>Politicians</a>,
<a href='get all the obama posts under the people taxonomy'>obama</a>

Because, again, terms apply to posts. Politicians and Obama are both
"People", but they are not the same "type" as each other, and so
shouldn't be in the same taxonomy.

-Otto