12

How about introducing to StackOverflow in order to make it easier to identify them?

The general idea is to have either moderators designate individual canonicals and/or auto tag those questions which have been given most often as a possible duplicate. This would allow us to limit searching for duplicates inside this tag - which presumably has the best quality answers - instead of having to wade through the full list of duplicates of varying quality. It might also encourage more users to contribute to a canonical instead of spreading answers between the dups.

Regarding being a meta tag: while that's true, I dont think it suffers from the same problem as , or mainly because it should be limited to either automatic application or by moderator decision. , while a meta tag is a functional tag.

Regarding should be : I think this does not represent how StackOverflow currently works. Tags are for questions and I've seen questions hijacked by one good answer turn into a collection of other high quality answers, so I'd say it's the collection of question and answers that counts. Also, the question itself could be edited to be phrased in a more canonical sense. Example https://stackoverflow.com/posts/3577641/revisions

|improve this question
  • 6
    Unfortunately it would be a meta tag – ChrisF♦ Jan 13 '12 at 12:43
  • 3
    Also wouldn't a canonical answer be a better idea? – ChrisF♦ Jan 13 '12 at 12:44
  • And assuming some way of designating canonical answers gets build, wouldn't that be a far more appropriate way of choosing one of the dupes as the canonical question? – yannis Jan 13 '12 at 12:50
  • Not sure 'canonical' is at all the right word; don't you just mean faq ? – AakashM Jan 13 '12 at 14:38
  • @AakashM the questions in the faq tab are likely good candidates for being canonicals for a tag but as long as you cannot search over just those question, i'd say no, its not the same. – Gordon Jan 13 '12 at 14:42
  • 3
    I see the use in this, but I really don't feel that great about introducing a meta tag intentionally. It describes what the question is, not what the question is about. php-reference sounds a little better to me, because it builds on the existing php tag (thus a search of the tag brings up only php questions).. but it's still (basically) a meta tag. I see the use for it, but I'd really like to hear what Jeff has to say. – Tim Post♦ Jan 13 '12 at 15:55
4

Isn't this sort of thing exactly what the tag wiki is for? Any particularly good questions related to a tag can easily get linked to from there. This also has the advantage of not being limited only to moderators.

I would much rather see the tag wikis get move love and attention than to have tags (which are already a limited resource, with only 5 per question) be used to do the same thing as a wiki can do, but better.

IMHO, a tag should be used to provide quickly find information about the same topic. Meta tags don't meet that goal.

|improve this answer
  • 3
    tag wikis dont cut imo. they are mostly overlooked and as long as they dont have subpages, they are simply too space inefficient. for instance, stackoverflow.com/questions/3737139/… is longer than the entire php tag wiki. – Gordon Jan 13 '12 at 14:07
  • I agree that tag wikis are far too often overlooked, and I think they they need to be made much more prominent and could use a few more features (like sub-pages or better internal organization / navigation). But in the question you linked to, that one question isn't in any way a comprehensive chunk of info about PHP. It's only one part of such a corpus, (and is an ideal candidate to have linked to from the PHP wiki), but it isn't the canonical question about PHP, only one of many such canonical questions about different aspects of PHP. Perhaps a "canonical" section in the wiki? – cdeszaq Jan 13 '12 at 14:18
  • 1
    Also, I cannot closevote against a tag wiki. – Gordon Jan 13 '12 at 14:18
  • I'm not sure what you mean by not being able to close-vote, but on SO, you can't vote on tag wiki edits until you have 5k rep, and can't free-edit tag wikis until 20k. Anyone can suggest tag wiki edits, but it's only a select few fairly trusted users that actually have the power to make changes permanent. – cdeszaq Jan 13 '12 at 14:22
  • Yes, but you cannot close a duplicate question with a link to the tag wiki. Also having a canonical tag (which could easily not count against the 5 tag user supplied max) is much more prominent than a link in the tag wiki. – Gordon Jan 13 '12 at 14:28
  • But you can close a dupe with a link to a question linked to from the tag wiki. I agree that a tag like you are proposing has it's advantages over a section of canonical links in a tag wiki, like being able to leverage the votes and other meta-data on the questions that links in a tag wiki can't do, but I still don't think it's enough of an advantage to justify reducing the importance of the tag wiki. I would much rather see effort put towards improving problems in existing tools than to add additional parallel tools to solve those problems. – cdeszaq Jan 13 '12 at 14:43
  • 1
    fair enough. I just think that the efforts required to make the tag wikis more valuable are much bigger than placing that single piece of information where most of the action is. The tag wikis are poorly integrated imo. – Gordon Jan 13 '12 at 14:47
  • I agree 100% that the tag wikis need to be moved higher in the "citizenship" chart. Not necessarily 1st-class, but definitely higher than they are now. – cdeszaq Jan 13 '12 at 14:49

You must log in to answer this question.

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