33

This is a discussion about if we should burninate this tag. It is not an invitation to burninate it. Anyone that attempts to ignore/suggests ignoring the official process risks moderator action.

I think we should burninate the tag. Here's the tag wiki and info:

Please don't use; the more specific [css-position] or [fixed-point] tags are preferred.

(review to be retagged or , remove otherwise)

So... I propose we burninate it. Let's look at the criteria:

  1. Does it describe the contents of the questions to which it is applied? and is it unambiguous?

    This tag is not clear. It can refer to any of the following:

    • Fixed point math (from the tag wiki)
    • Positioning elements using CSS (from the tag wiki)
    • Questions with issues that need to be fixed
    • Fixed time intervals
    • The fixed keyword in C#

  2. Is the concept described even on-topic for the site?

    Admittedly, somewhat, but... it's still a bad tag. Some of these are, such as the fixed keyword. And questions about problems that the OP wants fixed may be on-topic.

  3. Does the tag add any meaningful information to the post?

    No

  4. Does it mean the same thing in all common contexts?

    Absolutely not. See question #1 for some examples of other uses of the tag.

  5. Is the tag causing a fairly large amount of harm?

    Eh... it's not, like, hurting anyone (hopefully!). But, it's still a poor tag.

How should we deal with the tag? Burninate it? Retag questions with it? Something else entirely?

5
  • 3
    Maybe just clean it up and merge into css-position?
    – Dharman Mod
    Commented Oct 6, 2023 at 9:01
  • The answer "No" for "Does the tag add any meaningful information to the post?" doesn't look fair. According to your other description, the tag actually adds meaningful information: either a fixed math, or positioning in CSS, or something else. That is, burnination of the tag would require adding some other tag(s) for the questions. Despite of the note "A tag must fail ALL of those tests in order to be considered for burnination." in the referenced process, burnination of a tag could be performed even with passed one or more of "4 tests". So, do not force all of these tests to fail.
    – Tsyvarev
    Commented Oct 6, 2023 at 9:13
  • 5
    ... Actually, the great ambiguity (failed the 1st test) alone seems to be a very reason to somehow handle the tag, either by removing it or by synonymizing to some other tag.
    – Tsyvarev
    Commented Oct 6, 2023 at 9:17
  • No nuke from orbit. As per usual this opens a can of worms, if you click on that tag you get a wealth of pointlessness. I see one question tagged "css position css-position". Well now it's twice as clear!
    – Gimby
    Commented Oct 6, 2023 at 11:05
  • 1
    it also relates to I fixed it, which itself is very ambiguous
    – Vickel
    Commented Oct 6, 2023 at 21:16

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
22

I believe it's a good candidate for going. The absolutely fatal thing is that it has many different meanings and so contributes nothing formally but confusion. Nobody would want to watch the tag. It doesn't make anything easier to find. It doesn't help search engines categorize things.

Yes, that means there needs to be a clean-up job in Aisle 6.

5

I'm going to give yet another burn answer for a different reason. This tag is a cognitive hazard. Its mere existence invites people to add the tag to questions with full solutions to them. We definitely don't want any tag that does that.

Partial disambiguate guidance:

Fixed point math:

Fixed position css:

There's a large number of questions using for a kind of numerical analysis. I can't quite find the tag. If you find it, please edit it in here.

Fixed blocks in C#: ; most questions will also need (yup; that keyword goes with unsafe keyword)

A handful of questions (for example, this question) want .

2
  • Do not tag questions about fixed position CSS with [css-position] [absolute]. absolute is a different value for the position property with different rules and different behavior and we should not conflate the two. Using [css-position] alone should be sufficient for all of the values of the property.
    – Heretic Monkey
    Commented Oct 9, 2023 at 15:03
  • 1
    @HereticMonkey: Fixed. Sorry, I'm bad at CSS.
    – Joshua
    Commented Oct 9, 2023 at 15:04

You must log in to answer this question.

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