Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
Post History
Luckily, we are in a position where we don't have to re-invent the wheel. We can see what went either wrong or horribly wrong at SO, then avoid making the same mistakes. Some common problems: Maki...
Answer
#1: Initial revision
by
Lundin
·
2020-10-26T09:56:17Z (over 3 years ago)
Luckily, we are in a position where we don't have to re-invent the wheel. We can see what went either wrong or horribly wrong at SO, then avoid making the same mistakes. Some common problems: - Making too generic or ambiguous tags that could mean a lot of different things. - Allowing crap tags that describe what a question contains, not what it is about. Like asking "Is there a way to parse HTML with regex?" then coming up with the tags "way" and "parse". - Allowing company name tags. Ideally, each tag should be useful on its own. That's not always the case, but a tag such as "parse" couldn't even be useful in combination with another tag, it is simply too broad. Some example of crap tags we've already managed to create: "formula", "text", "format", "merge", "integer", "function", "charts", "bounds", "web". These are all way too broad and ambiguous and should never have been created.