# Does Math.SE accept non-research-level Theoretical Computer Science questions?

According to the CSTheory.SE FAQ, it does, but there isn't anything in the Math.SE FAQ that specifically allows these questions.

Could the Math.SE FAQ be amended to correspond to the CSTheory.SE FAQ's assertion that such questions are on-topic?

• I don't think there is any problem with CS questions, but we generally do not like «tell me about X» questions. In particular, they are not questions. – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Dec 12 '11 at 22:38
• @MarianoSuárez-Alvarez Thanks. I Googled the question, found a couple of good examples for the OP, and closed the question as "Off-Topic." In the meantime, could the Math.SE FAQ be clarified to more closely align with the CSTheory.SE FAQ? – Robert Harvey Dec 12 '11 at 22:48
• To more closed align with the CSTheory.SE FAQ in what aspect, specifically? – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Dec 12 '11 at 22:56
• The CSTheory.SE FAQ states that non-research-level Theoretical Computer Science questions should be directed at Math.SE. The Math.SE FAQ does not specifically address those kinds of questions. – Robert Harvey Dec 12 '11 at 22:59
• ...is that edit really necessary? I'd think "for all levels" was clear enough. And since people here have said $\text{Computer Science}\subseteq\text{Mathematics}$... – J. M. is a poor mathematician Dec 13 '11 at 0:08
• @J.M.: $\subseteq$ or $\subset$? – cardinal Dec 13 '11 at 1:27
• Mind you, this sentence in CSTheory.SE FAQ irritates me a bit, because basically it means that they treat Math.SE as a generic dump site. For example the coding theory questions that have been discussed in CSTheory.SE are IMVHO hardly at the research level. An advanced undergraduate/practicing engineer seems to be closer to the mark. Granted, coding theory is not really a mainstream CSTheory topic. Just saying. I think that the kind of question asked in the link would be off-topic here, and we should not welcome that kind of material here. – Jyrki Lahtonen Dec 13 '11 at 10:35
• @cardinal: $\subset$ is ambiguous. Do you mean $\subseteq$ or $\subsetneq$? – Asaf Karagila Dec 13 '11 at 11:34
• – Martin Sleziak Dec 13 '11 at 12:14
• @Asaf, Consider the question (Q) asking whether a given symbol must be understood as $\subseteq$ or as $\subset$. I find unlikely that somebody asking (Q) would use $\subset$ for $\subseteq$. Only somebody using $\subset$ for $\subsetneq$ could ask (Q), don't you think? – Did Dec 13 '11 at 13:52
• It's awesome that we're discussing ambiguous alphabets depending on context in a computer science meta-thread. – Unreasonable Sin Dec 13 '11 at 17:30
• @UnreasonableSin: You're welcome. – cardinal Dec 13 '11 at 18:18
• @Didier: I'm not what you're trying to say here; I don't use $\subset$ at all, and I often pick on others who do. Mostly because this symbol is ambiguous. Also, I guess nonsensical sarcasm doesn't go across comments very well :-) – Asaf Karagila Dec 13 '11 at 18:44
• @Asaf, I am trying nothing here and you see sarcasm where there is mainly puzzlement. Why do you pick on people who use $\subset$? Why did you see fit to pick on cardinal's comment? Since said comment was as unambiguous as can be, was it sarcasm from your part? (Just repeating the question of my first comment (which you did not answer), using another formulation.) – Did Dec 13 '11 at 19:57
• @AsafKaragila: Completely beside the point (as I did not intend to derail the discussion), but I find your comments on notation a tad peculiar. – cardinal Dec 14 '11 at 2:10