Remove content type requirement for vocabularies

I personally dont see why there should be a restriction on where a vocabulary should/nt be used...fair enough that certain modules want to create vocab for their own use but there is really no need to a vocab to be linked to a certain content type.

i.e. currently i am working on the user_tags module an want to create a vocabulary that is not linked to a content type (thats do able using taxonomy_save_vocabulary()) but if i wanted to change the settings of the vocab i created, i have to assign the vocab to a content which really is not necessary.

PS applied patch an works fine (removes required element of content type)

So, this is set to duplicate and the other patch is set to won't fix. Rather counterproductive, no?

Setting this issue back to its previous status.
-K

I agree that content type should not be required. Many times you create a vocabulary before you create the content type or create a vocabulary for other uses. +1

This is not a feature request. I would class this as a bug, but can live with task.

Thanks,
-K

I don't understand the use case and I'm tempted to mark this "won't fix". A taxonomy without a node type has no practical use.

I agree with both kkaefer's use cases. The first one definitely bugs me a ton and I end up having to select page for node type, then going back and changing it later. I've also use taxonomy before together with a custom module that did not categorize nodes. I still like this!

What if we set a message after a vocabulary is saved with no content types selected, which explains that the vocabulary won't do a whole lot and offer a link back to the edit page?

Marked http://drupal.org/node/116748 a dupe of this.

That last issue I mentioned actually includes another where upon UPDATING a vocab you don't have to select a content type which I've included in this patch. Also, a minor change to the wording for types/node types to make it more consistent/clearer. Still some "node" in user facing text on that page, but that's for another patch.

Additional use cases for taxonomies without content types:

1. Using the existing glossary module.
2. Administratively creating a vocabulary which will be applied to node types in the future, but for the time being is not. For example, during the development of the vocabulary before the terms are finalized, to prevent it from appearing to content creators.
3. I'm sure if we tried, we could dream up other use cases.

I think that it's a lot cleaner to just update the description text for the "content type" association check-boxes field to be more informative, rather than adding a rather redundant status message.

-K

Perhaps like so.

Missed a spot.

I think we'll want to write 'categorize' instead of 'categorise'. If you fix that I think this patch is RTBC.

Here you go.

Committed to CVS HEAD. Thanks.