I guess the question is really what the intent of the tagging was. I, for one, can't figure out what purpose [c#-language] serves that [c#] alone doesn't serve.
@PopularDemand the idea is, there'd be a distinction between questions about using a language, and questions about solving a problem (with solutions preferred in a given language)
This is a tough question to ask, because it will seem like I'm either informing on fellow SO'ers and/or concerning myself too much with Rank.
Here's the non-controversial version: jQuery is a library we all know, and it's written in JavaScript. What is the tagging policy for questions on popular...
@Shog9 I don't think there's really call for a tag in the case of "questions about solving a problem (with solutions preferred in a given language)"; the language seems almost like metadata in that case.
And the fact that you're having to explain this to me indicates that -- ignoring for the moment that I'm catastrophically stupid -- new/casual users are going to have issues with these tags.
@Shog9 That depends on your outlook. The difference was immediately apparent to me, but I have spent a lot of time thinking about languages and language features.
And I can see how that tag could be very useful to someone only interested in finding questions about particular language features
@Shog9 BTW, is the term "boxing" short for "being sent to the penalty box"? I ask because I'm a fan of a (former) TV show filmed in Vancouver, that used the term "boxing" to mean something similar.
@PopularDemand He chided me for starring the wrong message once. But as I said, I didn't quite understand what I was doing wrong, even after reading the FAQ entry again.
@wds a good many - if not the vast majority - of users on SO do not see the distinction - witness John's examples, and the vast number of questions tagged c# or other languages while asking questions specific to some framework using the language... or even less connected.
@Shog9 maybe Jeff's problem is that I was already kind of on a crusade to get people to distinguish between C# and .NET. I'd do this by commenting things like, "C# doesn't have a DataGridView. Did you mean Windows Forms?". I suppose that's being a bit of a jerk, but if there were complaints, the team never informed me of them.
@JohnSaunders Well, bless you for that, sir; having never worked with .NET, I still don't fully understand the difference. Or actually, I might, but I don't know for sure that I do.
@wds I guess I hadn't gotten around to it. I was trying to set the example for the tag by starting off with some of Eric Lippert's questions. This apparently drew ire when Eric was awarded the silver and gold c#-language badges!
@wds do you honestly want to retag the majority of the [c#] questions (and probably a good many [c#-language] questions as well, since some new users will almost certainly use both, just for good luck...)
@Shog9 That's why I started off with the questions I did. I wanted to be certain the distinction was clear, by choosing questions nobody would be interested in unless they were interested in the language itself.
@JohnSaunders The best -- or perhaps least-vague -- impression I had of .NET until now was that it was a framework that could be used by multiple languages, and that C# was just the most common user.
@balpha I edited the meta question recently to clarify my thinking a bit. Check out where I use the book "Essential C#" as an example, and find that only the first 13 chapters are clearly [c#-language] chapters.
FWIW, I do think there's room for a tag on questions explicitly on the C# standard itself, of which there are a few (and which would probably give Eric another badge...)
I started out editing "C#" questions to ".NET" because they were usually also applicable to VB.NET, and I didn't want the VB.NET developers to feel left out.
There are books out there entitled "something C#" that are more than half about .NET, so I see where the confusion can arise, but if you can write the same program in VB.NET, using the same .NET classes, then it's not a C# question, it's a .NET question.
@wds yeah, that's what I fear - that it'll become yet another losing battle, with everyone trying to carve out a section of questions that are "real language questions" but not quite agreeing on what that means.
@wds replace "touch the tags" with "do anything" and for a subset of users you'll be right
Having a c# tag is useful though. If I only know c# (yes, I know people should be able to figure out the other but that's besides the point) and I ask a question, I want answers in c#...and maybe the question isn't clear and doesn't have a code sample. That c# tag speaks to answerers. Or at least, I've been in that situation for figuring out what language to answer in.
just throwing this in: should we move this to a seperate room? there's a lot of good discussion in here that might be good to find in a dedicated place
Yesterday John Saunders added a new tag, c#-language, to 7 questions. There are quite many C# questions on Stack Overflow, but these 7 questions have high voted answers from Eric Lippert, who already received the new c#-language badge for them.
Should there be a different tag for these questi...
@LasseVKarlsen At one point on meta, I suggested not using [c#] and such, but rather having a separate "axis" that meant, "this is the language I want the answer in"
@PopularDemand I still think my answer is fine. I understand the reason now because John explained it, but I wouldn't have gotten it from just looking at the questions - so, for me at least, that's a fail.
Heh. Red tags: moderator-only. Blue tags: "I want my answer in this language." Green tags: meta-info. Ochre tags: content. Purple polka-dotted tags: subjectivity-related.
@LasseVKarlsen there are already tags for the particular versions. My theory is they should only be used where the question is specific to the version.
@LasseVKarlsen One way to find out what existing usage is, is to try something and see who complains. Though you might be threatened with suspension...
BTW, another thing that got me thinking about retagging is when I won the gold C# badge. That was all but automatic, simply by answering .NET questions! I don't deserve a badge for answering questions about C#, but I got one for answering questions where the answer was desired to be written in C#.
@LasseVKarlsen but since questions are tagged C# simply because that's the language the person is using, it makes that badge less meaningful than, say, the WCF badge.
For what's it worth: I asked the question because I thought a discussions was in place. As I've said, I don't think that's a bad idea, but that's besides the point. Obviously John had good intentions. I think Jeff's reaction was therefore exaggerated - threatening a ban seems almost out of line, and deleting the tag before a conclusion was made is in my opinion just as wrong as adding it.
I honestly don't see why there's an issue adding a new tag to an existing question. Would it have been a problem if I had only added that tag to new questions?
Yesterday John Saunders added a new tag, c#-language, to 7 questions. There are quite many C# questions on Stack Overflow, but these 7 questions have high voted answers from Eric Lippert, who already received the new c#-language badge for them.
Should there be a different tag for these questi...
