Post History
That's an awesome feature and I see quite a few tag families that could profit from being officially recognized as such. Here are some more points that might be relevant to a discussion about this ...
Answer
#4: Post edited
by
Secespitus
·
2020-07-07T21:43:57Z (over 4 years ago)
And added another point about differentiating that differentiating point
- That's an awesome feature and I see quite a few tag families that could profit from being officially recognized as such. Here are some more points that might be relevant to a discussion about this feature:
- 1. We have some pretty broad tags that might either need quite a few children or might possibly need to be reevaluated such as [writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/989), which seems to encompass basically everything on this site, or [fiction](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/7) and [non-fiction](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/63), which together would basically encompass everything. [style](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/36) is also a pretty broad topic with quite a few tags that could feasibly be seen as children, such as tags about writing styles. It's probably a good idea to check whether child tags make sense or the category is inherently too broad and should be broken down.
- 2. We could probably make citation and writing style related tags such as [mla](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/190) and [apa](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/232) children of [academic-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/150). These seem to fit the intentions behind making child tags quite well.
3. [tools](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/51) is another category where child tags make sense, for example for specific tools that get lots of questions such as [scrivener](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/228) or [microsoft-word](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/290). There is the question how we should handle [software](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/19) in this case though, or whether we might want to remove either "tools" or "software". For the documentation of software we already have [software-documentation](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/163) - which, by the way, would fit quite well with [technical-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/121).- 4. When searching for some tags you sometimes immediately find a few that could be grouped together. [publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/2) could have [electronic-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/148), [self-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/42), [scientific-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/143) and [independent-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/2865) as children. We have to be careful about how broad we want to make the parent-child connection though, as there are also tags such as [publisher](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/242).
- 5. [psychology-of-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/110) often encompasses [writers-block](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/40).
- 6. [figures-of-speech](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/181) goes with [rhetoric](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/171) and [metaphor](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/233).
- We could query the database for correlated tags and see which tags go together quite often. For now it might still be a good idea to go to SEDE for a first idea about which tags could make sense as a tag family here if we can't easily query the underlying database of codidact. But if that's possible in the long-term there might even be a sort of "moderator warning / notification" that certain tags correlate very often, but are not currently a tag family. This could help identify cases of very similar tags that have been accidentally created and should be merged or tag families that are not formally ordered as parent-child.
- That's an awesome feature and I see quite a few tag families that could profit from being officially recognized as such. Here are some more points that might be relevant to a discussion about this feature:
- 1. We have some pretty broad tags that might either need quite a few children or might possibly need to be reevaluated such as [writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/989), which seems to encompass basically everything on this site, or [fiction](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/7) and [non-fiction](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/63), which together would basically encompass everything. [style](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/36) is also a pretty broad topic with quite a few tags that could feasibly be seen as children, such as tags about writing styles. It's probably a good idea to check whether child tags make sense or the category is inherently too broad and should be broken down.
- 2. We could probably make citation and writing style related tags such as [mla](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/190) and [apa](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/232) children of [academic-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/150). These seem to fit the intentions behind making child tags quite well.
- 3. [tools](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/51) is another category where child tags make sense, for example for specific tools that get lots of questions such as [scrivener](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/228) or [microsoft-word](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/290). There is the question how we should handle [software](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/19) in this case though, or whether we might want to remove either "tools" or "software", though I remember that "tools" can also encompass analogous tools that for example help people make notes on-the-go. For the documentation of software we already have [software-documentation](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/163) - which, by the way, would fit quite well with [technical-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/121).
- 4. When searching for some tags you sometimes immediately find a few that could be grouped together. [publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/2) could have [electronic-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/148), [self-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/42), [scientific-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/143) and [independent-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/2865) as children. We have to be careful about how broad we want to make the parent-child connection though, as there are also tags such as [publisher](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/242).
- 5. [psychology-of-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/110) often encompasses [writers-block](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/40).
- 6. [figures-of-speech](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/181) goes with [rhetoric](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/171) and [metaphor](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/233).
- We could query the database for correlated tags and see which tags go together quite often. For now it might still be a good idea to go to SEDE for a first idea about which tags could make sense as a tag family here if we can't easily query the underlying database of codidact. But if that's possible in the long-term there might even be a sort of "moderator warning / notification" that certain tags correlate very often, but are not currently a tag family. This could help identify cases of very similar tags that have been accidentally created and should be merged or tag families that are not formally ordered as parent-child.
#3: Post edited
by
Secespitus
·
2020-07-07T21:43:00Z (over 4 years ago)
Added discussion point about differentiating "software" and "tools"
- That's an awesome feature and I see quite a few tag families that could profit from being officially recognized as such. Here are some more points that might be relevant to a discussion about this feature:
- 1. We have some pretty broad tags that might either need quite a few children or might possibly need to be reevaluated such as [writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/989), which seems to encompass basically everything on this site, or [fiction](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/7) and [non-fiction](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/63), which together would basically encompass everything. [style](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/36) is also a pretty broad topic with quite a few tags that could feasibly be seen as children, such as tags about writing styles. It's probably a good idea to check whether child tags make sense or the category is inherently too broad and should be broken down.
- 2. We could probably make citation and writing style related tags such as [mla](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/190) and [apa](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/232) children of [academic-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/150). These seem to fit the intentions behind making child tags quite well.
3. [tools](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/51) is another category where child tags make sense, for example for specific tools that get lots of questions such as [scrivener](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/228) or [microsoft-word](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/290).- 4. When searching for some tags you sometimes immediately find a few that could be grouped together. [publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/2) could have [electronic-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/148), [self-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/42), [scientific-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/143) and [independent-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/2865) as children. We have to be careful about how broad we want to make the parent-child connection though, as there are also tags such as [publisher](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/242).
- 5. [psychology-of-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/110) often encompasses [writers-block](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/40).
- 6. [figures-of-speech](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/181) goes with [rhetoric](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/171) and [metaphor](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/233).
- We could query the database for correlated tags and see which tags go together quite often. For now it might still be a good idea to go to SEDE for a first idea about which tags could make sense as a tag family here if we can't easily query the underlying database of codidact. But if that's possible in the long-term there might even be a sort of "moderator warning / notification" that certain tags correlate very often, but are not currently a tag family. This could help identify cases of very similar tags that have been accidentally created and should be merged or tag families that are not formally ordered as parent-child.
- That's an awesome feature and I see quite a few tag families that could profit from being officially recognized as such. Here are some more points that might be relevant to a discussion about this feature:
- 1. We have some pretty broad tags that might either need quite a few children or might possibly need to be reevaluated such as [writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/989), which seems to encompass basically everything on this site, or [fiction](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/7) and [non-fiction](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/63), which together would basically encompass everything. [style](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/36) is also a pretty broad topic with quite a few tags that could feasibly be seen as children, such as tags about writing styles. It's probably a good idea to check whether child tags make sense or the category is inherently too broad and should be broken down.
- 2. We could probably make citation and writing style related tags such as [mla](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/190) and [apa](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/232) children of [academic-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/150). These seem to fit the intentions behind making child tags quite well.
- 3. [tools](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/51) is another category where child tags make sense, for example for specific tools that get lots of questions such as [scrivener](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/228) or [microsoft-word](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/290). There is the question how we should handle [software](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/19) in this case though, or whether we might want to remove either "tools" or "software". For the documentation of software we already have [software-documentation](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/163) - which, by the way, would fit quite well with [technical-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/121).
- 4. When searching for some tags you sometimes immediately find a few that could be grouped together. [publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/2) could have [electronic-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/148), [self-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/42), [scientific-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/143) and [independent-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/2865) as children. We have to be careful about how broad we want to make the parent-child connection though, as there are also tags such as [publisher](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/242).
- 5. [psychology-of-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/110) often encompasses [writers-block](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/40).
- 6. [figures-of-speech](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/181) goes with [rhetoric](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/171) and [metaphor](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/233).
- We could query the database for correlated tags and see which tags go together quite often. For now it might still be a good idea to go to SEDE for a first idea about which tags could make sense as a tag family here if we can't easily query the underlying database of codidact. But if that's possible in the long-term there might even be a sort of "moderator warning / notification" that certain tags correlate very often, but are not currently a tag family. This could help identify cases of very similar tags that have been accidentally created and should be merged or tag families that are not formally ordered as parent-child.
#2: Post edited
by
Secespitus
·
2020-07-07T21:38:01Z (over 4 years ago)
Changed links to actually be links
- That's an awesome feature and I see quite a few tag families that could profit from being officially recognized as such. Here are some more points that might be relevant to a discussion about this feature:
1. We have some pretty broad tags that might either need quite a few children or might possibly need to be reevaluated such as [tag:writing], which seems to encompass basically everything on this site, or [tag:fiction] and [tag:non-fiction], which together would basically encompass everything. [tag:style] is also a pretty broad topic with quite a few tags that could feasibly be seen as children, such as tags about writing styles. It's probably a good idea to check whether child tags make sense or the category is inherently too broad and should be broken down.2. We could probably make citation and writing style related tags such as [tag:mla] and [tag:apa] children of [tag:academic-writing]. These seem to fit the intentions behind making child tags quite well.3. [tag:tools] is another category where child tags make sense, for example for specific tools that get lots of questions such as [tag:scrivener] or [tag:microsoft-word].4. When searching for some tags you sometimes immediately find a few that could be grouped together. [tag:publishing] could have [tag:electronic-publishing], [tag:self-publishing], [tag:scientific-publishing] and [tag:independent-publishing] as children.5. [tag:psychology-of-writing] often encompasses [tag:writers-block].6. [tag:figures-of-speech] goes with [tag:rhetoric] and [tag:metaphor]- We could query the database for correlated tags and see which tags go together quite often. For now it might still be a good idea to go to SEDE for a first idea about which tags could make sense as a tag family here if we can't easily query the underlying database of codidact. But if that's possible in the long-term there might even be a sort of "moderator warning / notification" that certain tags correlate very often, but are not currently a tag family. This could help identify cases of very similar tags that have been accidentally created and should be merged or tag families that are not formally ordered as parent-child.
- That's an awesome feature and I see quite a few tag families that could profit from being officially recognized as such. Here are some more points that might be relevant to a discussion about this feature:
- 1. We have some pretty broad tags that might either need quite a few children or might possibly need to be reevaluated such as [writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/989), which seems to encompass basically everything on this site, or [fiction](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/7) and [non-fiction](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/63), which together would basically encompass everything. [style](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/36) is also a pretty broad topic with quite a few tags that could feasibly be seen as children, such as tags about writing styles. It's probably a good idea to check whether child tags make sense or the category is inherently too broad and should be broken down.
- 2. We could probably make citation and writing style related tags such as [mla](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/190) and [apa](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/232) children of [academic-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/150). These seem to fit the intentions behind making child tags quite well.
- 3. [tools](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/51) is another category where child tags make sense, for example for specific tools that get lots of questions such as [scrivener](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/228) or [microsoft-word](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/290).
- 4. When searching for some tags you sometimes immediately find a few that could be grouped together. [publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/2) could have [electronic-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/148), [self-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/42), [scientific-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/143) and [independent-publishing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/2865) as children. We have to be careful about how broad we want to make the parent-child connection though, as there are also tags such as [publisher](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/242).
- 5. [psychology-of-writing](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/110) often encompasses [writers-block](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/40).
- 6. [figures-of-speech](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/181) goes with [rhetoric](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/171) and [metaphor](https://writing.codidact.com/categories/1/tags/233).
- We could query the database for correlated tags and see which tags go together quite often. For now it might still be a good idea to go to SEDE for a first idea about which tags could make sense as a tag family here if we can't easily query the underlying database of codidact. But if that's possible in the long-term there might even be a sort of "moderator warning / notification" that certain tags correlate very often, but are not currently a tag family. This could help identify cases of very similar tags that have been accidentally created and should be merged or tag families that are not formally ordered as parent-child.
#1: Initial revision
by
Secespitus
·
2020-07-07T21:24:54Z (over 4 years ago)
That's an awesome feature and I see quite a few tag families that could profit from being officially recognized as such. Here are some more points that might be relevant to a discussion about this feature: 1. We have some pretty broad tags that might either need quite a few children or might possibly need to be reevaluated such as [tag:writing], which seems to encompass basically everything on this site, or [tag:fiction] and [tag:non-fiction], which together would basically encompass everything. [tag:style] is also a pretty broad topic with quite a few tags that could feasibly be seen as children, such as tags about writing styles. It's probably a good idea to check whether child tags make sense or the category is inherently too broad and should be broken down. 2. We could probably make citation and writing style related tags such as [tag:mla] and [tag:apa] children of [tag:academic-writing]. These seem to fit the intentions behind making child tags quite well. 3. [tag:tools] is another category where child tags make sense, for example for specific tools that get lots of questions such as [tag:scrivener] or [tag:microsoft-word]. 4. When searching for some tags you sometimes immediately find a few that could be grouped together. [tag:publishing] could have [tag:electronic-publishing], [tag:self-publishing], [tag:scientific-publishing] and [tag:independent-publishing] as children. 5. [tag:psychology-of-writing] often encompasses [tag:writers-block]. 6. [tag:figures-of-speech] goes with [tag:rhetoric] and [tag:metaphor] We could query the database for correlated tags and see which tags go together quite often. For now it might still be a good idea to go to SEDE for a first idea about which tags could make sense as a tag family here if we can't easily query the underlying database of codidact. But if that's possible in the long-term there might even be a sort of "moderator warning / notification" that certain tags correlate very often, but are not currently a tag family. This could help identify cases of very similar tags that have been accidentally created and should be merged or tag families that are not formally ordered as parent-child.