2018-11-04T13:42:51-08:00 http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/ Lussumo Vanilla & Feed Publisher http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/138/elimination-of-redundant-tags/?Focus=1506#Comment_1506 2010-01-06T08:47:47-08:00 2018-11-04T13:42:51-08:00 Anton Geraschenko http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/2/

I've merged those. Let's move any further discussion to the other thread.

I've merged those. Let's move any further discussion to the other thread.

]]> http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/138/elimination-of-redundant-tags/?Focus=1501#Comment_1501 2010-01-06T07:39:15-08:00 2018-11-04T13:42:51-08:00 David Speyer http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/23/

Bad. We have discussed this issue before here, where we learned that moderators can merge tags. This seems like a good candidate for merger.

Bad. We have discussed this issue before here, where we learned that moderators can merge tags. This seems like a good candidate for merger.

]]> http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/discussion/138/elimination-of-redundant-tags/?Focus=1499#Comment_1499 2010-01-06T05:03:08-08:00 2018-11-04T13:42:51-08:00 Pete L. Clark http://mathoverflow.tqft.net/account/64/

Do we feel that it is a good or a bad thing to have multiple tags denoting the same, or essentially the same, subfields in mathematics?My initial feeling is that it is not so good -- since there is a ...

My initial feeling is that it is not so good -- since there is a maximum number of five tags per post, including redundant tags is a loss of information, and if someone uses a proper subset of a redundant set, it makes it harder to search.

I am thinking in particular of gn.general-topology and point-set-topology, which so far as I know are exactly the same thing.]]>