1
$\begingroup$

I was editing a question and I was about to tag it , but it occurred to me that tag might be too specific. I almost tagged it but its only connection to sorting is that the algorithm happens to be a type of sort, it's not about sorting per se.

So should we tag questions on a particular algorithm with the name of the algorithm or just the general category of algorithm?

| |
$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

This question is not about bubblesort, it only mentions it in passing, as an example. uses bubblesort as an example. It is not about bubblesort, it is about algorithm complexity. Neither bubblesort nor sorting would be relevant tags.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ +1. The fact that the algorithm is a bubblesort is incidental. $\endgroup$ – Patrick87 Mar 7 '12 at 19:43
1
$\begingroup$

I think we should usually stick to categories. We would get far too many tags otherwise.

Possible exceptions are algorithms that have many investigation-worthy variants, e.g. Quicksort.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think that if quicksort is tag-worthy, so is bubblesort. I mean, realistically, these are very commonly studied algorithms... how many named algorithms are you afraid will get tags? 10? 100? 1000? $\endgroup$ – Patrick87 Mar 7 '12 at 19:46
  • $\begingroup$ Hundreds are a possibility. As long as we can manage that I am fine with it. $\endgroup$ – Raphael♦ Mar 7 '12 at 21:47
0
$\begingroup$

I view tags as: subject classification (categories) + keywords. So if a question is bubble sort, it is good to have a tag for bubble-sort.

ps: I think Raphael has a valid point, but I think if every question has one or two subject classification tags then these tags will automatically become the most popular ones and will be easily recognizable from the rest.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ and there is this userscript to bolden subject classification tags. $\endgroup$ – Kaveh Mar 7 '12 at 18:50

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .