Jeroen Mulder Posted…

It largely depends on your visitors and the frequency and diversity of the information you're going to want to hold. To me categories have always felt more persistent and capable of containing related information in a hierarchy. Tags, however, feel more free and less definitive and are more a kind of meta data than a proper way of a archiving.

Not saying tags aren't capable of working as an archiving mechanism, because the past has shown it's perfectly capable of doing so. What tags do miss is a hierarchy and thus a kind of learning effect to the user allowing him or her to predict the location of certain information later on. Anyway, it's quite a personal opinion in that respect.

Trying to apply categories would seem a bit hard, as you'd need to find a middle ground between general and detailed categorization. Too general is worthless, as is too detailed. Looking at web-graphics and the type of subjects it covers (all related to web design and development) and the fact that a lot of articles cover multiple subjects, I would favour tags.

If possible, a combination of both would perhaps be ideal. Categories to indicate more general subjects used to quickly narrow it down to a collection of related tags. Perhaps naming categories in the form of tasks, such as "Designing your interface" or "Building your front-end" is an idea.

tom sherman Posted…

I think tags get far too much credit. They're nice for cross-site metadata, sure, but when you control the entire environment, categories are much more intuitive.