Damn, I had a detailed and great response queued and clicked submit to be presented with a login. Ugh. I'll try to respond again, but it's gonna be much simpler.
Why not edit the modules you deem as tagged inappropriately with what you think is the correct tag and serve the community while helping yourself?
Absolutely. I do this all the time, but it's a lot of stuff and my time is limited. Also, manufacturer lock :)
For instance, I find that Maths is primarily an Envelope Generator and not a Utility module, so you can clearly see that our points of view on what the main Function of a module is might differ.
True that, I wonder if a broader category like "Modulation" with sub feature filters that one could select multiple feature from would work? For example the user could select the FUNCTION Modulation and then select 1 or more multiple FEATURES like Attenuator, Envelope Generator, Mixer.
That being said, as I replied on your FB post, the question that tagging needs to answer to is whether a module can be used as X or not. If the answer is yes, then the tag should/could be applied.
I would definitely not want to limit the amount of information or anyones ability to cross-list items. I just think there may be abetter solution. Totally agree with you that if a module can be used as X it should state that.
Do not forget that some manufacturers tend to overstate what their modules contain and might also overtag just for marketing purposes; I have no concrete examples of their MO but I have seen some examples of overtagging when a module cannot actually offer such functionality. I simple edit on my part solved that but it's not always possible, especially if a Manufacturer decides to lock the module's description, as is their prerogative.
I think this could be solved with the suggestion I am proposing.
One easy and immediate solution to this problem would be to limit the tag option down to 2-3 tags at maximum. No exceptions. That would force uploaders/manufacturers to really have to decide what type of Function each module serves and by which tag it is best described. Does that mean that some modules would be underserved or underrepresented in particular categories? By all means, yes, that would be the case, especially for modules that have a million functions (I'm thinking Maths or Sports Modulator as good examples of that), but in my opinion that is a small price to pay to make MG cleaner.
It would certainly help get the ball rolling on cleaning up the data. Then maybe creating a FUNCTION drop down and a FEATURE attribute based filter might be easier.
We could add a multifuntional tag as a representative of that particular category. A "well, it does more than that" type of thing.
I am not sure adding a multifuntional tag would solve the problem. Though the idea is right in that broader categories to encapsulate modules main function might be beneficial. This is provided more detailed sub-tagging could be applied and the method for searches allowed one to select multiple features. It could mimc ecommerce product listing page filters. For example, if one is looking at a product listing page for the t-shirts category then could then select the colors black, red and blue from a filter list and not have to see white, yellow and orange.
But then again, I prefer clarity. Someone might disagree. r
To me, this is all about clarity.