Uniform set of categories for all sections that have them?

[jdporter]

Certain sections have categories, including (but (not?) limited to?): Tutorials, Code Catacombs, and Categorized Questions and Answers. Wouldn't it be cool if they all shared a common set of categories? If they did, then an enhanced synergy among these sections becomes an intriguing possibility.

Update
Take a look at the categories which currently exist in those three sections:

Code	CatQA	Tut
Audio	Arrays	CGI Programming
CGI Programming	CGI Programming	Databases
Chatterbox Clients	Data Formatting	Files and Directories
Cryptography	Data Structures	Functions, Subroutines, and Variables
E-Mail	Database Programming	Getting Started
FTP	Dates and Times	Miscellaneous
Fun	Debugging	Network Programming
GUI Programming	Directories	Object Oriented Perl
HTML	Files	Perl Idioms
Miscellaneous	GUI Programming	PerlMonks
Networking	Hashes	Regular Expressions
NT Admin	HTTP and FTP Clients	Specific CPAN Modules
PerlMonks	Input and Output	Tips, Performance, and Troubleshooting
Text Processing	Mail and News	Writing, Installing, and Using Modules
Utility	Math
Web	Network Programming
Win32	Numbers
	Object-Oriented Programming
	Programs And Processes
	References
	Regular Expressions
	Sorting
	Strings
	Subroutines
	Testing

There's something about this discrepancy that I find inelegant. Wouldn't it be nice if we could sync up the set of categories in each section, and keep them in sync going forward?

Update2:
I'm thinking it would be nice to have a category-centric view which cuts across the sections — or rather, ties them together. For example, if someone is interested in CGI Programming, they know where to go for tutorials, for FAQs, and for code samples/solutions.

I guess, when you come right down to it, the sections, as they're presented, are table-centric, which is to say, low level, but not necessarily natural from a user's perspective. Imagine a site doc with an index with entries like so:

• CGI Programming tut faq code

Fortunately, what I'm proposing doesn't involve any site code changes. Just some coordinated efforts among the Pedagogues (for Tutorials), Janitors (for Code), and QandAEditors.

[zentara]

I agree with you. There is often a fine line between a snippet and a CUFP, and many other catagories overlap so that you may not find what you are looking for, in the category you would expect the author to put it in.

But instead of reorganizing the categories, I think a better SuperSearch is what is needed. It says on the SuperSearch page that more improvements will be made? I don't know what they use, but it would be sweet if they used Swish( or something similar ) to index all keywords.

[rinceWind]

I think I get what you mean. A simple hyperlink could be generated between identically named categories.

For example, CGI Programming would contain a link Categorised Q&A, and the page QandASection: CGI programming would contain a link Code Catacombs, displayed fairly promenantly.

Tutorials would need integrating in a similar fashion, because the section doesn't currently have a node for each category.

[jdporter]

Tutorials would need integrating in a similar fashion, because the section doesn't currently have a node for each category.

Well, yes, actually it does. (See my example in the root node.) Modern Tutorials is a nested structure, i.e. a tree.

It's rather unfortunate that the sections are implemented so differently, and appear so differently to the user. One possible side-effect of this proposed approach is that people might become increasingly aware of the difference in look-and-feel between the sections.

[demerphq]

Im not sure I follow what you mean here....