Return to Answer

No matter which system we choose, with the tag synonym feature one set could be entirely mapped to the other.

I prefer not to have any prefixes, because

1. it is hard to draw a definite line which category is “established” enough to get the prefix. And if a tag's usage suddenly surge, should there be a massive tag rename?
2. the prefix is chosen arbitrarily. e.g. why is [general-topology] chosen to be gn. instead of gt.?
3. it's visually annoying :).
4. no other SO-based platform except MO has this system.
5. even if a user tags a question wrongly, a high-rep user could retag it, eliminating the “vagueness” argument.

No matter which system we choose, with the tag synonym feature one set could be entirely mapped to the other.

I prefer not to have any prefixes, because

1. it is hard to draw a definite line which category is “established” enough to get the prefix. And if a tag's usage suddenly surge, should there be a massive tag rename?
2. the prefix is chosen arbitrarily. e.g. why is [general-topology] chosen to be gn. instead of gt.?
3. it's visually annoying :).
4. no other SO-based platform except MO has this system.
5. even if a user tags a question wrongly, a high-rep user could retag it, eliminating the “vagueness” argument.

No matter which system we choose, with the tag synonym feature one set could be entirely mapped to the other.

I prefer not to have any prefixes, because  

1. it is hard to draw a definite line which category is “established” enough to get the prefix. And if a tag's usage suddenly surge, should there be a massive tag rename?
2. the prefix is chosen arbitrarily. e.g. why is [general-topology] chosen to be gn. instead of gt.?
3. it's visually annoying :).
4. no other SO-based platform except MO has this system.  
5. even if a user tags a question wrongly, a high-rep user could retag it, eliminating the “vagueness” argument.

No matter which system we choose, with the tag synonym feature one set could be entirely mapped to the other.

I prefer not to have any prefixes, because

1. it is hard to draw a definite line which category is “established” enough to get the prefix. And if a tag's usage suddenly surge, should there be a massive tag rename?
2. the prefix is chosen arbitrarily. e.g. why is [general-topology] chosen to be gn. instead of gt.?
3. it's visually annoying :).
4. no other SO-based platform except MO has this system.
5. even if a user tags a question wrongly, a high-rep user could retag it, eliminating the “vagueness” argument.

No matter which system we choose, with the tag synonym feature one set could be entirely mapped to the other.

I prefer not to have any prefixes, because

1. it is hard to draw a definite line which category is “established” enough to get the prefix. And if a tag's usage suddenly surge, should there be a massive tag rename?
2. the prefix is chosen arbitrarily. e.g. why is [general-topology] chosen to be gn. instead of gt.?
3. it's visually annoying :).
4. no other SO-based platform except MO has this system.
5. even if a user tags a question wrongly, a high-rep user could retag it, eliminating the “vagueness” argument.

No matter which system we choose, with the tag synonym feature one set could be entirely mapped to the other.

I prefer not to have any prefixes, because 

1. it is hard to draw a definite line which category is “established” enough to get the prefix. And if a tag's usage suddenly surge, should there be a massive tag rename?
2. the prefix is chosen arbitrarily. e.g. why is [general-topology] chosen to be gn. instead of gt.?
3. it's visually annoying :).
4. no other SO-based platform except MO has this system. 
5. even if a user tags a question wrongly, a high-rep user could retag it, eliminating the “vagueness” argument.