The Stack Overflow podcast is back! Listen to an interview with our new CEO.
4 added 28 characters in body
source | link

The tags and seem to cover similar ground (judging from the questions which have them).

However, the former can also be misunderstood as talking about the general congruence relation (i.e. a relation $R$ such that $aRb$ and $cRd$ imply $(a\circ c)R(b\circ d)$ with respect to some binary operation $\circ$).

As Willie Wong points out in the comments, there's also the "congruence" of triangles from Euclidean geometry.


Therefore, in the interest of descriptive tagging, I propose to:

  1. Retag those questions in which are about modular equations with . Possibly could be aA synonym for ; mentioning "congruence" would be needed -- avoiding the current pitfall;
  2. Retag the ones about congruence relations with (if they exist -- I didn't check);
  3. Retag the ones about triangles with and/or a new tag, e.g. ;
  4. Perhaps blacklist .

The tags and seem to cover similar ground (judging from the questions which have them).

However, the former can also be misunderstood as talking about the general congruence relation (i.e. a relation $R$ such that $aRb$ and $cRd$ imply $(a\circ c)R(b\circ d)$ with respect to some binary operation $\circ$).

As Willie Wong points out in the comments, there's also the "congruence" of triangles from Euclidean geometry.


Therefore, in the interest of descriptive tagging, I propose to:

  1. Retag those questions in which are about modular equations with . Possibly could be a synonym for ;
  2. Retag the ones about congruence relations with (if they exist -- I didn't check);
  3. Retag the ones about triangles with and/or a new tag, e.g. ;
  4. Perhaps blacklist .

The tags and seem to cover similar ground (judging from the questions which have them).

However, the former can also be misunderstood as talking about the general congruence relation (i.e. a relation $R$ such that $aRb$ and $cRd$ imply $(a\circ c)R(b\circ d)$ with respect to some binary operation $\circ$).

As Willie Wong points out in the comments, there's also the "congruence" of triangles from Euclidean geometry.


Therefore, in the interest of descriptive tagging, I propose to:

  1. Retag those questions in which are about modular equations with . A synonym for mentioning "congruence" would be needed -- avoiding the current pitfall;
  2. Retag the ones about congruence relations with (if they exist -- I didn't check);
  3. Retag the ones about triangles with and/or a new tag, e.g. ;
  4. Perhaps blacklist .
3 added 84 characters in body
source | link

The tags and seem to cover similar ground (judging from the questions which have them).

However, the former can also be misunderstood as talking about the general congruence relation (i.e. a relation $R$ such that $aRb$ and $cRd$ imply $(a\circ c)R(b\circ d)$ with respect to some binary operation $\circ$).

As Willie Wong points out in the comments, there's also the "congruence" of triangles from Euclidean geometry.


Therefore, in the interest of descriptive tagging, I propose to:

  1. Retag those questions in which are about modular equations with . Possibly could be a synonym for ;
  2. Retag the ones about congruence relations with (if they exist -- I didn't check);
  3. Retag the ones about triangles with and/or a new tag, e.g. ;
  4. (Perhaps Perhaps blacklist .)

The tags and seem to cover similar ground (judging from the questions which have them).

However, the former can also be misunderstood as talking about the general congruence relation (i.e. a relation $R$ such that $aRb$ and $cRd$ imply $(a\circ c)R(b\circ d)$ with respect to some binary operation $\circ$).

As Willie Wong points out in the comments, there's also the "congruence" of triangles from Euclidean geometry.


Therefore, in the interest of descriptive tagging, I propose to:

  1. Retag those questions in which are about modular equations with ;
  2. Retag the ones about congruence relations with (if they exist -- I didn't check);
  3. Retag the ones about triangles with and/or a new tag, e.g. ;
  4. (Perhaps blacklist .)

The tags and seem to cover similar ground (judging from the questions which have them).

However, the former can also be misunderstood as talking about the general congruence relation (i.e. a relation $R$ such that $aRb$ and $cRd$ imply $(a\circ c)R(b\circ d)$ with respect to some binary operation $\circ$).

As Willie Wong points out in the comments, there's also the "congruence" of triangles from Euclidean geometry.


Therefore, in the interest of descriptive tagging, I propose to:

  1. Retag those questions in which are about modular equations with . Possibly could be a synonym for ;
  2. Retag the ones about congruence relations with (if they exist -- I didn't check);
  3. Retag the ones about triangles with and/or a new tag, e.g. ;
  4. Perhaps blacklist .
2 added 231 characters in body; edited title
source | link

Should Disambiguating the [congruences] and [modular-arithmetic] be merged?tag

The tags and seem to cover similar ground (judging from the questions which have them).

However, the former can also be misunderstood as talking about the general congruence relation (i.e. a relation $R$ such that $aRb$ and $cRd$ imply $(a\circ c)R(b\circ d)$ with respect to some binary operation $\circ$).

As Willie Wong points out in the comments, there's also the "congruence" of triangles from Euclidean geometry.


Therefore, in the interest of descriptive tagging, I propose to:

  1. Retag those questions in which are about modular equations with ;
  2. Retag the ones about congruence relations with (if they exist -- I didn't check);
  3. Retag the ones about triangles with and/or a new tag, e.g. ;
  4. (Perhaps blacklist .)

Should [congruences] and [modular-arithmetic] be merged?

The tags and seem to cover similar ground (judging from the questions which have them.

However, the former can also be misunderstood as talking about the general congruence relation (i.e. a relation $R$ such that $aRb$ and $cRd$ imply $(a\circ c)R(b\circ d)$ with respect to some binary operation $\circ$).


Therefore, in the interest of descriptive tagging, I propose to:

  1. Retag those questions in which are about modular equations with ;
  2. Retag the ones about congruence relations with (if they exist -- I didn't check);
  3. (Perhaps blacklist .)

Disambiguating the [congruences] tag

The tags and seem to cover similar ground (judging from the questions which have them).

However, the former can also be misunderstood as talking about the general congruence relation (i.e. a relation $R$ such that $aRb$ and $cRd$ imply $(a\circ c)R(b\circ d)$ with respect to some binary operation $\circ$).

As Willie Wong points out in the comments, there's also the "congruence" of triangles from Euclidean geometry.


Therefore, in the interest of descriptive tagging, I propose to:

  1. Retag those questions in which are about modular equations with ;
  2. Retag the ones about congruence relations with (if they exist -- I didn't check);
  3. Retag the ones about triangles with and/or a new tag, e.g. ;
  4. (Perhaps blacklist .)
1
source | link