2
$\begingroup$

I was checking tags and I saw that "slicer" has only 6 questions, and no clear use case since there is already "slicing".

There are some options now:

  • reclassify those 6 questions into "slicing" and then set the two tags as synonyms
  • clarify the purpose of each tag which likely includes renaming them, because right now picking the correct one may not be obvious to most users. This may involve a general (re)classification into each tag of questions which were mistagged or not tagged with either one
$\endgroup$
8
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yeah, sounds like it could be a good idea. However, is there really no difference between slicer and slicing? I can't think of any differences, off the top of my head - unless the former is about the software and the latter is the process. I see that slicer has no tag info, defining how the tag is meant to be used, whereas slicing does have a clear tag usage. More importantly, leading on from that, are the tagged questions themselves tagged "correctly"? $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 9 at 18:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Do the questions in the two tag groups have different leanings, i.e. those tagged slicing are more process oriented and those tagged slicer are more software oriented? $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 9 at 18:29
  • $\begingroup$ @Greenonline yes, "slicing" could be referred to the math/process of slicing and "slicer" to software related questions. But then it should be written and there's a lot of tagging to be done to make it meaningful $\endgroup$
    – FarO
    Feb 11 at 23:09
  • $\begingroup$ +1 - For bringing this question up $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 12 at 16:26
  • $\begingroup$ @Greenonline it would be good for Stachexchange to provide tools for mass-tagging. Obviously to be used by very high-ranking members (or specifically nominated members) to avoid troubles, but it would help a lot $\endgroup$
    – FarO
    Feb 13 at 9:02
  • $\begingroup$ You would need to raise a question of the main meta site for that. However, as the analysis shows, mass tagging fortunately (hopefully) will not be required in this case $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 13 at 9:04
  • $\begingroup$ FWIW, I have retagged the four questions that where incorrectly tagged as "slicer" by their OP's. So that leaves just two questions. $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 28 at 20:00
  • $\begingroup$ @Greenonline I'm not sure how I should proceed now, or whether I should do anything to begin with. I'm not a mod/admin/anyone relevant, so I think my task ends here with this questions and my answer with the proposal. $\endgroup$
    – FarO
    Feb 29 at 8:58

3 Answers 3

2
$\begingroup$

This isn't an answer, but rather an appraisal of the situation and analysis


From earlier comments

Yeah, sounds like it could be a good idea. However, is there really no difference between and ? I can't think of any differences, off the top of my head - unless the former is about the software and the latter is the process. I see that has no tag info, defining how the tag is meant to be used, whereas does have a clear tag usage.

More importantly, leading on from that, are the tagged questions themselves tagged "correctly"?

Do the questions in the two tag groups have different leanings, i.e. those tagged are more process oriented and those tagged are more software oriented?


At first look

As stated in the question, there are currently 204 questions and 6 questions.

The missing tag info for is easy to add - anyone can do so. I don't know why it wasn't added when the tag was added (more about this below, see Further Analysis).

Whilst having two tags seems to make sense, the questions should be checked to see that they have been tagged correctly (i.e. software or process oriented). This isn't an insurmountable task, although 204 is a bit of a chore. It's been done before, see the maker and model meta question, Tag Maintenance Summer 2019.

However, if while checking whether the questions have been tagged correctly, it then becomes a bit of a headache actually distinguishing the questions correctly - that is to say, determining whether or (or even both!) applies - then maybe, one should be the synonym of the other.

Further analysis

Looking at the dates of the two groups of questions, it seems that is actually a (relatively) recent tag, presumably introduced in May 2021 with this question, How to fix zits and blobs caused by Cura? , which seems to be reasonable as the question is about Cura, rather than slicing, in general. However, I might be wrong in thinking this, I don't know - maybe would have still be sufficient tag for this question, in which case, the whole issue started with this question.

However, further checking reveals that was only added to that question, a month ago by this edit. So, really, this question could be retagged to without issue, as it has only had the (alleged) "wrong" tag for a few weeks.

That leaves 5 remaining questions, and then the next oldest question tagged is Are there any slicers that use anti-aliasing (such as FXAA) for higher quality thumbnail generation?, which is where and when the tag was introduced - 30 Nov 2023 - so it really is a late addition. Interestingly, the same user edited the previous, older question to add the .

Again, this question could be considered to be about slicers rather than slicing, but whether that merits having a new tag, that could potentially cause endless confusion, and mis-tagging, down the line.

The other four remaining questions were tagged as by their respective OPs, and while at least two of them (Does FreeCAD produce a wrong stl for slicer software? and Effect of top thickness on print with bumps on top) could be considered correctly tagged as , IMHO moving them to wouldn't harm the questions. The other two (Encountering some weird layer gaps on the last few lines of a particular print and Deformed 45 deg angle on outer wall) look to have been incorrectly tagged, and would be more appropriate.

Update: I have retagged these last four questions as

Was there a need for a new "slicer" tag?

I would like to ask the OP, who introduced the tag, their reasoning for doing so, as well as:

  • Why no tag info was added for , in order to distinguish its use from that of ?
  • Was the existing deemed not to be appropriate, if so, why not?

I would suggest that we wait for an answer/response to those questions, before we even consider blatting the tag (or creating a synonym).

There may be a legitimate reason to have a distinct tag, especially if there is a need and desire to separate software from process.

Moving forward

It may be decided by the community that a distinction is required and hence the need for two tags.

However, if it is determined that there isn't a real need for a new tag, then we have two options:

This latter option seems the easiest option and just returns everything to the way that they were prior to having been introduced.

$\endgroup$
8
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Very nice analysis! I'm in favor to retag, and update the slicing tag to include process and software questions should be tagged with this tag. $\endgroup$
    – 0scar Mod
    Feb 12 at 22:03
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks. Yes, I definitely agree. However, the devil's advocate in me says that having one tag for both process and software is great... for a small amount of questions. However, as the number of questions grows, and the two groups of questions grow in size, will it become more and more difficult for someone to find a "slicer" software-based question, when they aren't interested in the process (i.e. the "slicing" tagged questions)? Does that make sense? However, I must admit that I struggle to think of why such a scenario would exist. $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 12 at 22:18
  • $\begingroup$ The questions about the slicing theory and process may be retagged with a clearly defined tag, like "slicing-theory". People will type "slic" in the tag field and see both "slicer" and "slicing-theory" and hopefully get what they mean, not to mention the summary also provided. "slicer" could also be renamed (is it possible?) to something more clearly directed to the software usage $\endgroup$
    – FarO
    Feb 13 at 9:07
  • $\begingroup$ @FarO - Yes, renaming is possible. Whilst I was playing devil's-advocate in my comment above, I did have a secondary thought overnight that maybe even with two well labelled tags, we could still end up with a new user typing slic and then wondering which tag to choose, and potential mis-tagging occurring. So, I have now (for the moment) come back over to the side of just one tag - just for ease of administration. Just my thoughts, this morning. $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 13 at 9:22
  • $\begingroup$ However, it should be said that the proposal of having two tags has now changed the nature of your original question somewhat. We've gone from synonym, through removing this new slicer tag, and now back to having two tags. The more options that there are, then the more complication finding a resolution becomes. The correct way, would be to hammer out in this question what the options are, and then, once they have been decided, then a new voting meta question should really be posted so that a clear voting structure is achieved. $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 13 at 9:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This does seem overly complicated, when we could just revert back to the way everything was pre-Nov 2023 $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 13 at 9:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I updated the question to reflect the options. $\endgroup$
    – FarO
    Feb 14 at 14:53
  • $\begingroup$ Just updated my new answer from yesterday. I got cut short in my writing as I had to go do something else. $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Mar 29 at 15:45
1
$\begingroup$

Right now the tags "slicer" and "slicing" may have different meaning, but likely most people using the site won't notice it.

We could

  • delete "slicer" and retag the 6 questions into "slicing" but we should also add a description for it,
  • rename them into "slicer-software" and "slicing-theory" to make obvious to most people whether we are talking about usage or the math/theory behind.

Since the theory behind slicing should be covered by a tag (there are questions about it from time to time) and I see none, "slicing-theory" could be the one. Of course some (re)tagging to make use of the new tag is needed.

I am in favour of the latter.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, the latter option (which is more elegant and "future-proof") would require us going through 204 questions re-tagging as appropriate. The former option is much easier to implement. By future-proof I mean that in ten years time, when there are 1000 questions, it will be easier to find a theory question or a software question if we have two tags. The question is, do we want to go through some pain now to have this "nice future"... or do we just put the issue off and have a similar situation to Y2k or UNIX 2038 bugs, and just let someone else deal with it, later..? Over-dramatic? Maybe. $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 14 at 15:21
  • $\begingroup$ Nice answer, btw. However, it might be a good idea to split your two options into two answers - otherwise what does an upvote on your single answer mean? $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 14 at 15:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ 204 questions plus potentially many more not tagged as slic* at all, but a quick search could find them easily $\endgroup$
    – FarO
    Feb 15 at 13:56
  • $\begingroup$ @Greenonline I thought this is about discussion only, and another question will be opened about the actual voting $\endgroup$
    – FarO
    Feb 15 at 13:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, good point. We can still do that, but I thought maybe posting two answers, might mean we don't need to post another meta vote question. However, my long and windy non-answer probably makes it difficult/confusing to turn this into a voting question - so yeah, a separate voting meta question is probably the best way to go. Also, good point about some questions that may not be tagged at all. $\endgroup$
    – Greenonline Mod
    Feb 15 at 15:00
1
$\begingroup$

I have removed the offending tag by retagging questions to .

Problem solved :-)


If you, or anyone else, wishes to go through all of the questions and perform the "slicer-software" and "slicing-theory" procedure, then you are more than welcome. You don't need to be a mod or admin, or whatever to do that.

Anyone with sufficient reputation can create tags, create tag descriptions, synonyms and perform retagging.

See Privileges for more information:

  • 150 -> create tags
  • 1250 -> tag synonyms
  • 1500 -> approve tag edits
$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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