tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Elimination of redundant tags?)

Anton Geraschenko comments on "Elimination of redundant tags?" (1506)

Anton Geraschenko — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:47:47 -0800

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

David Speyer comments on "Elimination of redundant tags?" (1501)

David Speyer — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 07:39:15 -0800

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

Pete L. Clark comments on "Elimination of redundant tags?" (1499)

Pete L. Clark — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 05:03:08 -0800

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 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.