11

I edited this question to improve the formatting. However, when I clicked "Save", it complained that the "Title was too short". This seems unfair to me since I didn't modify the title and had no interest in doing so. I tacked on "...?" but felt a bit silly for doing so.

11
  • 7
    status-bydesign. If you're editing a question, you're supposed to fix as much as possible. It doesn't matter if you had no interest in doing so, you should always do a complete edit :)
    – agf
    Oct 12 '11 at 4:24
  • 9
    @agf, but I'm confused. If the title is too short, why was the title not too short when the OP first asked the question!?
    – Kirk Woll
    Oct 12 '11 at 4:26
  • 3
    Furthermore, honestly, I think the sentiment "you're supposed to fix as much as possible" is actually wrong. Every little improvement helps.
    – Kirk Woll
    Oct 12 '11 at 4:30
  • 10
    @agf The logic in that is seriously lacking. If somebody came over and volunteered to mow your lawn, would you say "I'm going to need you to weed the garden too, otherwise get lost"? Oct 12 '11 at 4:36
  • 7
    @MichaelMrozek In this case I kind of feel like it's more like someone offering to only mow half of your lawn. But that aside, I think the more relevant issue is that the system held the editor to a higher standard than the OP, which does seem wrong.
    – Tim Stone
    Oct 12 '11 at 4:50
  • 1
    @Tim, but really, we are talking about potentially different skill sets. I admit I answered a question on C# (which I do a lot of), but I was only trying to improve the formatting. What if the question had been on Haskell or something? In that scenario I might not even have been in the position to properly fix the title -- I don't think there should be an expectation that one person needs to always make the question perfect. We're a community! Imagine if evolution was held to the standard that every improvement must get you from neuron to human brain.
    – Kirk Woll
    Oct 12 '11 at 4:57
  • You're right, I think my objection stems more from a non-defensible hang-up over the fact that the person who still has to come along and fix the title would have almost definitely fixed the code as well anyway. There's no logical reason that should prevent you from performing that edit though, so fair enough.
    – Tim Stone
    Oct 12 '11 at 5:30
  • @MichaelMrozek Not my logic. I was repeating the answer given every time I've seen a question saying "But I just want to do a potential edit"
    – agf
    Oct 12 '11 at 7:07
  • @KirkWoll I have no idea. Maybe just to hold editors to a higher standard?
    – agf
    Oct 12 '11 at 7:07
  • 1
    @agf Or... only validate title if changed, which wouldn't be that hard. This is something which I came across recently -- I noticed that a particularly old post needed some help getting the formatting to work, so I went in and put a <!-- language: lang-lisp --> before the block. It would not let me submit that edit even though it was more than justified because the title pre-dated the original standard. Oct 18 '11 at 13:59
  • [status-norepro]? I guess that it was caused and fixed by meta.stackoverflow.com/posts/187235/revisions
    – Rob W
    Nov 9 '13 at 11:35

Browse other questions tagged .