We might as well call them dimensions....

I would think that tagging reduces the field in the same way that search does. It is about neighbourhoods of similarity. The multi dimensionality of the tags I care about create a space that I can navigate. So it is still successive approximation and quite random, whatever that means (Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) has an online free book that attempts to answer what randomness is or isn't). I could not do as much Web work both at home and at work without delicious. It is not perfect, but I can find what I need. I usually over tag knowing that I can filter.

Inspiration for me is about matching the rational attributes that worked before to elicit emotion to try to make it happen again. It is about preference as it is wired in each individual. If I can find a set of attributes that describes my preferences then I have a generalization that works for the time being, at that moment. Usually this takes the form of a single artist - persons embody a set of attributes most easily. But then there is no need for tags, so where they become useful is when they can find connections between similar individuals or bands, like that web site that used to work in Canada and that found similar songs to the ones you liked. It is just a reduction of the statistical space to a neighbourhood.

Generally there are so many ways to slice and dice that it just becomes another way to navigate the world. The problem I guess is that the online world is so unconstrained in space that any constraints or guidance is welcome. It is an evolving thing.

As applied to music I think there are analogies, but the musical tradition helps reduce the dimensional space to something that may not require computers. Styles. I just want to try to push that boundary and do mash ups that may lead to emotional connections and surprise. Ultimately it is about creating beauty, which is the promise of happiness.