What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 129 Stack Exchange communities.

I just spotted a tag called . The wiki description makes it pretty brief:

This tag is a signal that the answer to this question should NOT contain any javascript as a part of its solution.

This tag wiki is a signal that the tag should NOT exist.

share|improve this question
    
... Was there actually a need to post this question instead of just silently removing the tag? –  waiwai933 Dec 18 '12 at 7:50
1  
@waiwai933: Considering that it has just received an answer from someone whose question contained the tag, yes. –  BoltClock's a Unicorn Dec 18 '12 at 7:50
    
And if you had not posted this question, would that user have noticed and complained on meta? –  waiwai933 Dec 18 '12 at 7:53
    
@waiwai933: The user has to be on meta to notice, so chances are he would have posted asking why the tag was removed anyway if I hadn't posted. You know how vocal people can be about getting their tags removed, so you could consider this a preemptive self-post. –  BoltClock's a Unicorn Dec 18 '12 at 7:54
1  
You're running a strict tagging ship here guys. I can understand the reasoning behind describing content, but why wouldn't a NON tag be useful, especially when it's very good at filtering? Need more brain power to process? –  CSᵠ Dec 18 '12 at 8:41
    
Seems like you more-or-less unilaterally burninated a tag, and got +103 rep in the process? It's good to be a moderator ... –  John Dec 18 '12 at 23:06
    
@John: It's meta rep, so it's irrelevant. –  BoltClock's a Unicorn Dec 19 '12 at 2:03

2 Answers 2

I actually like it because I don't like code to be run on my machine (or someone else's that has a slow one and the designer doesn't care because 16x multiple core processors is his standard).

Proposal: add to the wiki answer something like This tag is a signal that code in question does NOT contain any javascript as a part of its architecture or that javascript can NOT be used for some reason (eg. very slow CPU, javascript not available, run when javascript disabled)

EDIT1:

Questions to consider for meta tags

  1. does it add value? (not taking into account the proposed usage)
  2. is the "damage" greater than the value?

EDIT2:

Example of a 'too good' filtering meta-tag

Consider this tags: [number] [not-odd]

[number] question related to numbers - OK

[not-odd] question related to ?? maybe numbers, maybe straight, maybe - ??

[number] [not-odd] question related to numbers that are not odd => even numbers probably - OK

share|improve this answer
1  
I don't think you understand what a "meta tag" is and why it's so frowned upon, nor have you clicked the link. Then again, my question was badly-written, so I'm going to rewrite it to make the link more prominent. –  BoltClock's a Unicorn Dec 18 '12 at 7:48
    
true, didn't see that link (contrast and lum on my LCD are bad) but I read the "related" and I think my answer threw some other kind of light on the problem. So even if the circumstances to use it as a single tag are slim, it could still define the content (with the ^ mentioned addition to the description) but intuitively probably –  CSᵠ Dec 18 '12 at 8:10
4  
The thing is that "I'm looking for a solution that does not involve Javascript" isn't a thing that should be a tag. –  Charles Dec 18 '12 at 8:19
1  
What's the desired method of signaling that "I can't use JS" then? –  CSᵠ Dec 18 '12 at 8:22
1  
@Charles: in the web today this would be a perfect example for a tag, not for a "category" but a tag (or a "meta-tag" if you want) –  CSᵠ Dec 18 '12 at 8:23
2  
The way to say that you don't want a solution in Javascript is to not tag the question with any Javascript-related tags and mention in the question body that you don't want a JS solution... and give a reaason for it. Like "this code needs to run in Lynx, so it can't be done using Javascript." –  Charles Dec 18 '12 at 8:26
    
Interestingly, I intuitively searched for it while tagging the question and was glad. Second best option was to amend the text with something like that @Charles. –  CSᵠ Dec 18 '12 at 8:31
    
Yes, that is also the most natural way of saying it. –  BoltClock's a Unicorn Dec 18 '12 at 8:35
up vote 7 down vote accepted

Welp.

share|improve this answer
    
Somewhat related: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/139913/… –  BoltClock's a Unicorn Dec 18 '12 at 7:32
    
+1 for this cool graphic ... –  NullPoiиteя Dec 18 '12 at 7:47

You must log in to answer this question.

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