Ah, time to resurrect my good old [Implicit tagging hierarchy](http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/58073/implicit-tagging-hierarchy) suggestion: While a question about [tag:visual-studio-2010] is _obviously_ about that specific version of [tag:visual-studio], using the latter tag additionally is nonsense to me - it wastes space for a tag that is already implicitly present, but everyone has to use a `visual-studio*` wildcard (which fails to render correctly when typing [tag:visual-studio*] by the way...) and this is not possible for other tags where the implied hierarchy is not visible in the name, e.g. [tag:class] in [tag:oop]. That's why I suggested an _implicit_ tagging hierarchy, where adding a tag for which _unambiguous_ parent tags exist (a [tag:class-members] question in [tag:c++] should require the [tag:c++] tag explicitly since it could also be e.g. [tag:python] or [tag:java], while both [tag:class] and [tag:oop] are implicit parents) those tags should be treated as present on search/ignore/favorite queries but not be explicitly waste one of the five tag slots.