3

We have a tag :

and :

Inasmuch they are useful, we should keep one, as they seem to mean the same thing.

While I can see what the tag is supposed to mean — questions about changing text in a buffer — having a tag called “(text-)editing” on a site about a (text) editor is weird. I'm not convinced that the tag is sustainable: tags with overly general face meanings are prone to misuse. Do we need a tag about this concept? Can we find a better name?

| |
5

having a tag called “(text-)editing” on a site about a (text) editor is weird.

I thought so too. Then I paid a visit to the front page and took a stroll about our questions. I could find at most a couple of questions there which fit this tag. All the others are about displaying, interaction, customization, etc. {Insert joke that emacs's not a text editor here.}

Although very broad tags do tend to be misused, it might just be that this tag isn't too broad after all.

Regarding which version to use.
This is a very minor consideration, but "text-editing" could be mistaken to mean "prose-editing" (as in not code).

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

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