Sub tag / tags in tree structure


I have been used PP for 40 days and finally made up my mind to give up using Papers and join PP’s family :smile:

There are too many tags (>100) in my PP and they are used for quite different purposes.

For example, I set best paper, dataset, demo, impressive, or other words as a group of “feature” tags; approach 1, approach 2, approach 3 to mark papers that using different approaches/methods; and project 1, project 2 to mark papers that are related to some on-going projects …

It will be much more tidy in the sidebar if tags could be presented in a tree-structure layout.

Thanks for your hard work! :smiley:

1 Like

Great to have you on board. “Folders” are basically hierarchical tags (or labels as they are called in Paperpile). We have added them exactly for the reasons you describe. Many users use folders in combination with labels. You could have a “Project 1” folder that contains papers labelled “Impressive” using your examples.

You can put a paper in many folders so they really behave like labels.

1 Like

But, labels are much more BEAUTIFUL than folders :joy: :joy: :joy: :joy: :joy:


Hello Stefan!
Tag groups are still a great idea. Folders are natural to use for project management, I understand that paper can be put in many folders.
Tags are great for searching your library by tag combinations. Tag groups may just make tag organisation way more clean as it was said above you may have “method” tags “subjective opinion” tags, “object” tags and so on. Currently, I have to regularly delete lots of tags just because the tag panel is getting too large to navigate. I either need different tags for different projects or tree of tags to suit all projects.
Why can’t it be done?
Edit: Maybe just add the ability to change color of folders as they are essentially labels with subcategories. Color coding helps a lot


I tend to think that “labels” are the attributes of the paper itself from the objective point of view. “Folders” are subjective to the reader (me) and are useful for project management. I agree with @satary. Tag hierarchy should be a thing!


I would also like to see this. I use folders specific for projects which comes and goes tags are for forever. I keep the numbers of my folders low at any point of time to focus more only on few tasks at hand.

I also wanted to export such tags and tag-tree in this form for examples, “tag”, “tag/subtag/subsubtag” and so on.
I will ask elsewhere but, just mentioning here.

1 Like

Thanks for the bumps, @phizaz and @Rahul_Kashyap. This is still not planned for now, but the topic is on our tracker with your +1s nonetheless for the team to keep in mind.

Hi Paperpile Team,

I wanted to give +1 on this. I am realizing while folders are nice, I am using them less and less. Tags are easy and not mutually exclusive. A paper can belong to multiple categories. A grouping or hierarchy of tags would help tag items either by a lower level of tag which automatically implies higher level of the hierarchy but not the other way around. For example, I could have all my deep learning papers, and specific to unsupervised learning. Once I mark unsupervised learning, it automatically implies deep learning without having to manually tag them all. Searching also being much easier. But the same paper could belong to medical imaging which is a completely different branch of the hierarchy tree. For these reasons, I would even argue that once a tree of tags are implemented, folder become redundant or maybe even useless.

Another advantage of tree of tags is that I don’t have one giant list but a rather more manageable tree to organize my tags.

I would like to hear what other users think about this feature.



Wait you can add the same paper into multiple folders? Ok will give it a shot, but still not the same and convenient like the tags.

1 Like

Just migrated from Papers3 to Paperpile. Definitely +1 from me. I’m still deciding between Paperpile and Zotero and hierarchical labels are exactly what make me gravitate towards Zotero (even though Paperpile works better in many other regards). Folders are not an alternative to labels for a number of reasons. One main reason is that folders are not a standard part of any interchange format but labels/keywords are part (eg of RIS). Thus, if one of my colleagues or students wants to import a shared library into another tool, they can do with labels but not with folders. That’s a bit of a showstopper. Migrating from folders to labels for this very reason saved my life in the migration from Papers3 to Paperpile. I now use folders exclusively for shared libraries or for temporary sorting.

1 Like

By the way, this does not require a complex transition to hierarchical labels. All that is required is the ability to restrict the displayed list of labels to only those used in the current selection of papers and that should be very easy to implement without chanign any of the underlying functionality (as an option?)


+1 to hierarchical tags. I avoid folders because folders don’t show contents of sub-folders and can’t be color coded.

Being able to nest tags would be a huge quality of life improvement for me.

I like the suggestion of color coding the folders, that would make me use them more.