2:17 PM
So did anyone ever bother responding to my "why does retagging a handful of questions make Saunders eligible for boxing" question?
(i see someone starred the question...)
Did he actually get boxed?
No, just a public threat
goes to double-check that this is still the case
@Shog9 Ah, I thought perhaps it had escalated since I last checked in.
@Shog9 It didn't change, I just checked after I asked.
2:19 PM
Blah, those two sentences really got crossed in my head.
@wds "boxed" is a non-American term for "getting suspended"; as in, "put in the penalty box"
oh, from ice hockey
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.
i get it now, although i feel he's trying to bail out the ocean
his explanation for why he added c#-language is perfectly fine
2:25 PM
@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)
questions about language features, though all the java language questions are just tagged java
Q: Should jQuery questions always be tagged with "javascript"?

Crescent FreshThis 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.
@PopularDemand the c#-language tag is closer to the content of the question than the c# tag, though.
@wds I'll read that question again, but I'm not seeing it right now.
2:29 PM
c# is merely the language the question asker is using, if the tag is c#-language, C# is the subject of the question
FWIW: in that instance, a... certain user managed to re-tag quite a few questions, eventually resulting in a language badge for himself.
That's the distinction I think he was making. Makes sense, but probably overthinking it
@PopularDemand it is. But, getting folks to stop using it is difficult
I like language tags, answers can be very API-specific
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.
2:32 PM
@PopularDemand There's tons of stackoverflow idioms that wouldn't be apparent to a new user
@wds Hardly a reason to go and create more.
@PopularDemand Not a reason to shy away from them either
it's one think for an idiom to be unfamiliar. Everything starts out that way.
It's another for the idiom to require an extensive explanation before it can become familiar
@wds I just edited the question on meta to include an even better example. An MS Access question with no C# code, that's tagged [C#].
@JohnSaunders see, that tag should just be removed
2:35 PM
@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.
@JohnSaunders yes
But I don't know of any connection to Vancouver, other than Jeff's hockey analogy
I like it because it sounds suitably violent
like "boxing day" (which, I just learned, isn't actually supposed to be violent)
@Shog9 How do you feel about "binning"?
@Shog9: cool. The connection is likely only in my mind, but it explains to me why the tv show used the term "boxed" as they did.
@PopularDemand i think "pigeonholed" and get confused.
2:38 PM
@Shog9 Time for you to send out some "I'm sorry I punched you in the face" cards?
It's like Jeff's policies for starring in chats. Reading the FAQ wasn't very enlightening to me
@wds Jeff has policies for that?
@Shog9 which is the tag that should be removed? [c#]? That's exactly what I decided not to do when I added [c#-language]
@PopularDemand fortunately, I'm in the US and don't celebrate that holiday. But I'm much less intrigued by the brits now
@Shog9 But you could still solve the mystery of Boxing Day's etymology!
2:39 PM
@JohnSaunders yes, [c#] should be removed from that question. And probably replaced with [sql]
@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.
@Shog9 go right ahead. I'm already under threat of suspension.
@Popular, take the numbers with a grain of salt, but codesharp.co.uk/dvorak
@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 there's a reason we have a retag feature
2:43 PM
@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.
why btw is this question not tagged c#-language stackoverflow.com/questions/3588956/…
@wds and yet my tiny "retagging" seems to bother people, even when I didn't remove the previous tags.
@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!
@JohnSaunders done
2:46 PM
@PopularDemand well, C#/.NET doesn't make the distinction particularly easy
@PopularDemand Know C++? It's like the distinction between C++ and the standard library.
@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...)
@balpha I disagree. If you could have written the exact same question but tagged [vb.net] then it's not a [c#] or [vb.net] question.
@Shog9 I don't really care. I think the majority would be tagged c# tho
@JohnSaunders I see... can the standard library be used outside of C++?
2:48 PM
@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.
@PopularDemand the C part of it can... ;-P
@JohnSaunders agreed, but it's not always that easy
@PopularDemand I haven't seen it done, but I suppose if there were another language compatible with C++, then it could use the library.
e.g. you have LINQ expressions (a language feature) mapping to the extension methods (a framework feature)
@balpha I know it's not that easy. The questions I chose to (re)tag were those where it was easy. I left the gray areas out.
2:50 PM
@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.
Still, that helps.
@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.
Anyway, it's not necessarily a good idea to do so. Once you start on these, you'll need a c-language and a java-language and a ruby-language...
@PopularDemand that's exactly correct. Yet there are developers out there who think the two are the same.
How about just tagging these questions with [language-features]
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...)
2:52 PM
@wds that would be fine with me, though it seems one has to ask permission
@JohnSaunders I believe I was one of them, in my first few years of college.
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.
Everybody gets upset when you touch the tags on their question anyway
Fact of life
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
2:55 PM
@Shog9 Yeah, but that's what we do here. We come to a consensus. I was only planning to start the process, then see where it went, if anywhere.
There is, however, a legitimate reason for tagging a question about using some .NET class as C# as well
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.
And that is that the person asking wants answers that provide code to do so in C#
@JohnSaunders That's fine - I'm just throwing in my $0.02; it irritated me that I couldn't get a better discussion going on the Meta topic
I don't say it is a legitimate use of the tag, but the reasoning is sound
2:56 PM
@Shog9 Are you going to update your answer because of this?
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
Q: Congratulations Eric Lippert for finally winning the c#-language badge.

KobiYesterday 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...

@balpha I was just thinking that; room created.
@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"
(That is a terrible title, though.)
2:57 PM
@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.
@Shog9 I wasn't finished tagging, btw. Just got tired and had to sleep. Woke up next day in the middle of a controversy and threat of suspension.
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.
heh... Yeah, that sucks.
Wow. Got "my own" room
I feel special.
I'll move the messages from the tavern over here in a sec
it's just a whole lot
2:59 PM
@John, technically isn't this a room for Eric? :P
@rchern well, yeah, but I'm hoping this is as close as I get to my own room
HELLO!!! HEL-LO! Hel-lo! lo! lo...
goes to read through the question and answers since I've only skimmed it so far
@JohnSaunders padded cell...
@Shog9 All too likely
3:01 PM
← 106 messages moved from The Tavern (General)
(Rainbow-themed blink ing marquee tags: Always Friday in Iceland.)
I like Grace Note's answer, using [language] in concert with [c#].
(It'd be nice if answers copied better).
@LanceRoberts We already have [language-features], as wds noted
@PopularDemand Hm, that empty room echo message is really out of place now.
3:03 PM
You can't micro-tag anyway
I guess migrated messages retain their timestamps.
Or you will suddenly have opposing forces that quarrel about whether the new LINQ-extensions should have a different tag than extension methods
@LasseVKarlsen What do you mean by 'micro-tag'?
being too narrow
yeah I'm with GraceNote on this
3:04 PM
if you want C#-language, how about differing between C# versions?
@LasseVKarlsen already there
or should the dynamic keyword added in 4.0 be lumped together with extension methods from 2.0?
@Shog9 I'm fine with that also, the important point is using a different tag to differentiate, in addition to the base-language tage.
@LasseVKarlsen probably, you can supply the version number in the question
@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.
3:05 PM
@LasseVKarlsen: well, the versioned tags do already exist, so if you can be consistent with existing usage
But that is the problem is it not?
"being consistent with existing usage"
What is existing usage?
As always, when people are involved, hard machine-rules cannot be applied, you need some leniency
@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...
There's a C#-2.0 tag?
ah yeah found it
They're popular too
I suppose it makes sense if your question only applies to that particular version
Though I doubt that's the case for all of them
3:10 PM
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#.
Yeah, but that doesn't mean you're an expert on the C# language, it only means you have many upvoted answers with the C# tag on the question
(I don't know whether you're an expert or not, nothing implied :))
@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.
That's a bit more likely to indicate expertise
As I said, you cannot apply hard rules to this
I agree. I would never have considered asking for an automatic retag for c#-language. That's why I was doing it by hand.
poor Eric Lippert, is all I can say
3:14 PM
@wds Yeah, won't he be surprised?
@JohnSaunders he'll still make gold c# badge probably :)
anyway time for me to head home
@wds bye. Almost time for me to head to work!
2 hours later…
5:26 PM
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.
2 hours later…
7:38 PM
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?