Timeline for Is [data] an useful tag? Do we need it? What should we do?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
8 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sep 6, 2010 at 17:12 | vote | accept | Tamara Wijsman | ||
Sep 6, 2010 at 7:29 | history | edited | BinaryMisfitMod | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 75 characters in body
|
Sep 5, 2010 at 22:11 | comment | added | Jeff Atwood | I have destroyed this tag -- NONE of the posts it contained are now [untagged] which is also strong evidence it was in fact a meta-tag (cannot stand alone) | |
Sep 5, 2010 at 22:09 | comment | added | Jeff Atwood | actually you're not using the proper criteria: 1) could you have a question with ONLY this tag and 2) does the tag commonly mean different things to different people -- by these criteria [data] is VERY weak and I would consider it quite close to a meta-tag. See blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags | |
Sep 4, 2010 at 11:37 | comment | added | Tamara Wijsman | Because I notice the tag now, which has only been used 70 times, and it seems incorrect for most of the questions. But well... I'll leave this question open for others to think about it. It indeed isn't a big issue, but it made me wonder... | |
Sep 4, 2010 at 5:42 | comment | added | BinaryMisfit Mod | @Tom No it's not extra. I see no problem with anyone using this tag, since tags should not appear in titles, and the word data may not be part of the title. Seriously. Drop it. It's one out of a 1000 tags and there are others I would be more worried about. It's been used for a year and until now it's never been a problem. Why now? | |
Sep 3, 2010 at 22:00 | comment | added | Tamara Wijsman | Okay, it might not be a meta tag... But does the tag itself tell anything extra? Should we be using this tag? One could deduce [data] from the tile or another tag, one could merge the [data] tag with another one (which the user meant in the first place), ... | |
Sep 3, 2010 at 21:00 | history | answered | BinaryMisfitMod | CC BY-SA 2.5 |