I have noticed that there is a suggestion to make and synonymous in the list of suggested synonyms. See also synonyms for integration. (The users with sufficient rep in that tag can vote there.)

I believe that it is useful to have some discussion before making changes to tags containing large number of questions. In this way we will find out whether MSE users approve joining these two tags together and, if they are going to be kept separate, perhaps the usage of these two tags could be clarified a little more. (This might lead to improvement of the tag-wikis, if we find out that it is needed.)

My understanding of the two tags is that the tag should be used solely for questions dealing with computation of integrals, whether includes anything related to integration - theorems, definitions, proofs, etc. At least this is how I read the tag-excerpts for these two tags. I also had some discussion about these tags in chat and this older questions is also related: Tags derivatives, integral, limit only for computation questions?

At the moment, the tag-excerpt for reads:

Questions on the evaluation of definite and indefinite integrals

The tag has the following tag-excerpt.

All aspects of integration, including the definition of the integral and computing indefinite integrals (antiderivatives).

So these are the main questions, for which I would like to know the opinion of other users:

  • Do we want to keep the tags and separate or should they by synonymized.
  • If they are kept separate, what exactly is the difference between them?

EDIT: I'd say the situation here is similar to and , which is already an approved synonym. The tag-excerpt for does not say that it is for computation of derivatives only. (IIRC there used to be something along those lines in the tag-excerpt some time ago.) Now the tag-excerpt says: "Questions on the evaluation of derivatives or problems involving derivatives (for example, use of the mean value theorem)."

EDIT 2: Now I have found the suggestion to make them synonyms in the long thread on tag merging and synonyms. This suggestion has 6 upvotes and no downvotes there. (As you can see, I have commented there, but I somehow managed to forget that this was discussed in that thread.)

  • $\begingroup$ I would guess that at this point you are the more experienced user referenced in this chat comment! $\endgroup$ – user642796 May 23 '13 at 9:16
  • $\begingroup$ But I have to admit that this chat thread seems to have followed my thoughts. At this point I cannot think of a natural way to make a distinction between the two tags that cannot be better achieved by applying another tag, such as calculus or real-analysis. $\endgroup$ – user642796 May 23 '13 at 9:24
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I think these tags should be merged. $\endgroup$ – Alexander Gruber May 25 '13 at 2:22
  • $\begingroup$ Several people have said in comments that they think that the two tags should be merged. The other post about this has several upvotes. But no-one has posted an answer here and the suggested synonym has not received any upvotes, either. So I've decided to post two competing answers, so that people can upvote/downvote and show their opinion on this. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak May 27 '13 at 6:55
  • $\begingroup$ There seems to be sufficient support for making the two tags synonyms, so I have accepted the answer suggesting this and I have also upvoted the synonym here. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak May 31 '13 at 6:01

I think that the tags and should be synonymized.

(Please upvote or downvote this answer to show whether you agree with this suggestion.)


I think that the tags and should be kept separate. The first one should serve only for questions for computation integrals. (Perhaps adding a synonym could be useful.) The later is suitable for questions concerning definitions, theorems and proofs about integrals. (Perhaps would be a suitable synonym for this one.)

(Please upvote or downvote this answer to show whether you agree with this suggestion.)


A third suggestion. I think that should be banned. It is too likely to cause confusion and misuse.

should then be reserved for the abstract aspects and foundations of integration (e.g. limit and interchanging theorems).

should be forced to split into and ; I'd say (almost) all questions should in fact be in either of these more specific tags (some exceptions could end up in both).

(Please upvote or downvote this answer to show whether you agree with this suggestion.)

  • $\begingroup$ As you allude, there are two kinds of definite integrals: those that are evaluated using anti-derivatives (and hence indefiniteintegrals), and those that are evaluated using other techniques (e.g., integral transform, contour integration, etc.). Funny that sums follow the same pattern, but nobody is speaking of breaking up the sequences-and-series tag. $\endgroup$ – Ron Gordon May 27 '13 at 19:02
  • $\begingroup$ Even if the integral tag is kept, using tags for definite and indefinite integrals makes sense. An older discussion on this: Integrals and sums: please tag as definite vs. indefinite. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak May 28 '13 at 8:31
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @RonGordon wrote: Funny that sums follow the same pattern, but nobody is speaking of breaking up the sequences-and-series tag. There is a distinction for sums; (summation) is for finite sums, and (sequences-and-series) is for infinite sums. This is when (summation) tag has been introduced: “summation” tag for finite and formal summations. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak May 28 '13 at 8:33

You must log in to answer this question.

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