"combinatorial number theory"

"linear fractional transformations"

The software forbids these two tags because they are too long. Should the length limits be adjusted? Or is there some way of making special exceptions?


Should the length limits be adjusted?

For the most part 25 characters suffice, and it is also a road-block against exaggeration in tag names. Say, I would not want to see tags like .

However, it is a fact, and you gave some example, that there are some legitimate and natural tag names that are longer than 25 characters. Thus, I think at least something more flexible than a hard limit would be desirable.

Or is there some way of making special exceptions?

As far as I know, no. On some sites they came up with the workaround of chopping up the tag name and then creating synonyms to piece things together. But, this is not a real solution either.

Thus, for the cases you mention, I propose to use abbreviations, like contracting the 'theory.'

Here is an old and somewhat popular feature request on the main Meta site

Increase limit on tag length

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Using the compactness theorem, if every abbreviated term has a tag, then the expanded, whole term has a tag! $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Dec 22 '16 at 11:33
  • $\begingroup$ If absurd tags like the one you mention are created, could there not be some routine way of discussing them and deleting them when that is appropriate? $\endgroup$ Dec 22 '16 at 18:21
  • $\begingroup$ @MichaelHardy sure, all I meant to say is that there is also some merit in having a rather tight bound. Also, having some bound for the input-field is more-or-less a technical necessity to avoid attacks. The question then is what does one take exactly. I agree that something a bit longer than 25 would be better. In a prior life I already wrote about this. $\endgroup$
    – quid Mod
    Dec 22 '16 at 19:51

You must log in to answer this question.

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