What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 133 Stack Exchange communities.

Looking at the Community Faq for How do I correctly tag my questions?

  • meta tags, tags that cannot stand alone as the only tag on a question, are not allowed.

I think is meta-tag (as described by Jeff in a blog post ) and should be burninated


[Note by MTibbits]: Personally I don't think this is a meta tag -- I added links and edited trying to keep the OP's intent -- but I still think it should be removed. I think is ambiguous and should be removed to avoid many-to-one tag synonym relationships: e.g. ++=. See my answer below.

share|improve this question

closed as off-topic by Martijn Pieters, ChrisF, animuson, Shadow Wizard, Monica Cellio Jul 23 at 20:56

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "This question pertains only to a specific site in the Stack Exchange Network. Questions on Meta Stack Exchange should pertain to our network or software that drives it as a whole, within the guidelines defined in the help center. You should ask this question on the meta site where your concern originated." – Martijn Pieters, ChrisF, animuson, Shadow Wizard, Monica Cellio
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

3  
To your pitchforks! Seriously, [id] can arguably be a legitimate standalone tag. After all, there's no [html-id] tag (yet). –  Frédéric Hamidi Aug 7 '11 at 21:06
3  
Why do you want to do such a thing? :-( Think about all those 729 questions that will miss the tag. –  user162697 Aug 7 '11 at 21:10
1  
@Siva most of them don't lose anything without this tag –  RiaD Aug 7 '11 at 21:15
3  
@Siva, sorry but It's hard to me to differ serios thing from jokes in english –  RiaD Aug 7 '11 at 21:18

4 Answers 4

up vote 1 down vote accepted

Agreed, it is now burninated.

tag burninated

share|improve this answer

When I began this answer, I thought it was reasonable to keep this tag. There are times when is the fundamental concept of a question. For those other times, e.g. when a question would be tagged with:

or even:

That these more specific contexts would be identified by the tag suggestion mechanism and the users would be more likely to realize: + = .

However, if you search the tags and type in 'user', the tag appears so far down that it wouldn't be suggested. I believe, at present, the dialog only shows six options.

I think this is a case of ++ = to a more specific tag. At present, the synonym system is not designed to support/handle many-to-one relationships.

Hence, I now too think this tag should be deleted. Should a user wish to use only, they still would have the option of or which are quite contextually similar.

share|improve this answer
    
You would have to first identify each variation of the tag and fix it, before you could remove the [id] tag. –  Robert Harvey Aug 8 '11 at 15:34
    
Yep. It's will be a lot of work - Something I certainly wouldn't do without unanimous/blessed approval. –  M. Tibbits Aug 8 '11 at 15:44

The one thing that makes me vote for burnination is this:

Is the tag likely to be searched?

That's my one rule for tag validity.

User case 1: I'm an expert at [some technology|concept], I want to look at [some technology|concept] questions.

User case 2: I have a question regarding [some technology|concept], was this question asked before?

In my mind, I see no reason why people would want to look-up questions, nor any possibility of there being an expert.

Burninate (or combine with session/user) it is.

share|improve this answer
    
No, but you might search for [session]+[id] –  Robert Harvey Aug 8 '11 at 15:35
1  
@RobertHarvey Then the tag should be [sessionid] or [session-id]. –  MPelletier Aug 8 '11 at 15:37
1  
While there's been a recent push towards more specific tags, it's not at all self-evident to the average user that [sessionid] is better than [session] [id]. A search for [session]+[id] seems perfectly reasonable. –  Robert Harvey Aug 8 '11 at 15:38
    
@RobertHarvey But it becomes a non-issue when tags that can be misleading are no longer available, especially to new users who don't have tag creation rights. –  MPelletier Aug 8 '11 at 15:46
1  
True, but if you typed in "session id" it would convert to "[session] id" and the appropriate questions would most likely still show up. –  M. Tibbits Aug 8 '11 at 15:47
    
I keep tabs on certain tags with RSS feeds to prevent them from propagating. Among others, my, which is a valid Perl keyword, but is often used for MySQL, which users will enter as "my sql". –  MPelletier Aug 8 '11 at 15:47

No, use suggests its used in combination with very specific things, like How can i get the resource id of an image if I know its name?, which uses android image resources id tags.

share|improve this answer
5  
Isn't that just an indication that people don't know how to tag? For example, there are questions tagged [session] and [id] when there's a perfectly good [sessionid] tag available. –  Wooble Aug 8 '11 at 3:30
1  
While there's been a recent push towards more specific tags, it's not at all self-evident to the average user that [sessionid] is better than [session] [id]. Also, [sessionid], by convention, should have a dash in it, i.e. [session-id]. –  Robert Harvey Aug 8 '11 at 15:37

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .