# {graphics}, {figures} & friends: Do we need all of them?

Assuming the retagging proposal regarding {floats}, {tables} and {figures} is implemented, questions about the figure environment should be tagged with . This begs the question what (if any) area of application remains for the tag.

The graphics-related tag with the most questions attached to it is . Its wiki entry says: "Use the {graphics} tag for general questions regarding inclusion of graphical material in your document, usually from an external file. If you'd like to discuss vector graphics created programmatically inside a TeX document, use the general {diagrams} tag, or preferably the tag for the vector graphics package you use (e.g. {tikz-pgf} or {pstricks})."

, and seem like good choices to me. On the other hand, I noticed that while the tag features 27 questions at the moment, only one of them is also tagged with . I take that as a hint that is rather used as a synonym for and could be merged with it.

Then there's the tag (14 questions). There's -- 86 questions at the moment, but prone to twindle because of the upcoming retaggings to . And there may be even more graphics-related tags I've overlooked.

Please provide input as to which graphics-related tags you view as essential, and which as dispensible.

• Do you have a plan, how to coordinate the retagging effort? Should different people work on different tags? – Caramdir Feb 25 '11 at 22:44
• @Caramdir: First, let's wait a day or so if another answer is added that differs significantly from @Martin's. If not, I suggest that one person (me/you?) sorts through the {figures} and {picture} tag, and another person (you/me?) inspects the {tables} tag (which is bulkier, but hopefully less in need of retagging). A third person (with moderator powers) could be responsible for merging and creating tag synonyms. – lockstep Feb 25 '11 at 23:09
• @Caramdir: And it goes without saying -- flooding the starting page is to be avoided. – lockstep Feb 25 '11 at 23:10
• @Caramdir: Last, but not least: With the start of our retagging effort, the tag wiki entry for {floats} should be replaced by the one proposed here. No need to produce new improper taggings while we correct old ones. – lockstep Feb 25 '11 at 23:32
• This has come up several times, first by Martin then later by me. Happy to see something going ahead! – Will Robertson Feb 27 '11 at 4:06

• - unnecessary, can be removed from basically all questions without loss of context removed.
• - synonym to {floats} EDIT by lockstep: Questions tagged with will be retagged manually.
• - keep
• - seems redundant mostly, but could be made a synonym to {diagrams} removed.
• - not very familiar with this, but seems that {tikz-pgf} should cover this already. Apparently this tag has a merit of its own, so it should stay as it is.
• , - merged, possibly with a new name
• - synonym to {graphics} removed.
• - synonym to {graphics} removed.

I do not agree that the taggers use as a synonym to -- for me the fact they are not used together is that askers and taggers feel they are covering different grounds. The questions currently marked are usually in the form of "How to create <diagram-type>?". For me, these are conceptually different from what is cover by by virtue of the method they are being created (programmed by a macro language inline vs. inserted from an external image).

• I agree, except that I think pgfplots should be kept separate. It is used often enough and sufficiently different from pure TikZ/PGF that it warrants a tag of its own. – Caramdir Feb 25 '11 at 21:50
• I too begin to see virtue in {diagrams}. And I really like the suggestion about a {subfloats} tag. – lockstep Feb 25 '11 at 22:07
• Skimming the questions tagged with {picture}, I think they should be retagged manually (but there are only about a dozen). – lockstep Feb 25 '11 at 22:20
• @lockstep: You already have experience with mass manual retagging, so that shouldn't be a problem for you :-) – Martin Tapankov Feb 26 '11 at 6:54
• @lockstep: Well, there is no tool to just remove a tag, so they'd have to be done by hand in any case. – Joseph Wright Feb 26 '11 at 17:03
• ok, I destroyed the picture tag since that seemed particularly low-value. there is one question tagged untagged now though. – Jeff Atwood Feb 26 '11 at 19:37
• Question formerly tagged {untagged} now features the {diagrams} tag. – lockstep Feb 26 '11 at 20:03

I ask a moderator to do the following:

The and tags will be retagged manually within the next few weeks.

• Should tables and tabular be merged in the end? – Caramdir Feb 27 '11 at 2:32
• @Caramdir: Good idea! I overlooked that {tabular} (unlike {tabularx} or {booktabs}) doesn't stand for a package name. – lockstep Feb 27 '11 at 10:58
• I have some thoughts to it, have a look at my answer. – Stefan Kottwitz Feb 27 '11 at 16:26

I decided to use the form of an answer in response to locksteps post.

• My first check for showed that the questions are not only about diagrams but also about drawing shapes and the like.

• Merging is ok. However, subfigures don't necessarily have to float, imagine the subcaption package used with minipage environments. That's why I prefer the master tag for the merge instead of .

• This is mixing a command, a package and a concept together. I think it goes too far and takes us the possibility to distinguish grapics inclusion from graphics creation.

• @Stefan: a) {drawing} Do you mean that some questions should be retagged, and some left alone? Are diagrams and drawings distinct enough to justify different tags? b) {subfigures} I defer to our opinion. c) I was under the impression that {graphics} is now about inclusion, and {diagrams} (or special tags like {tikz-pgf}) about creation. With that in mind, I'm still for the suggested synonyms. – lockstep Feb 27 '11 at 16:37
• @Stefan: The middle part should be "I defer to your opinion". (Freudian slip, anyone?) – lockstep Feb 27 '11 at 18:19
• @lockstep: a) Let's keep {drawing} for questions which are not about diagrams: drawing geometric objects and shapes and the like. {diagrams} feels just wrong for drawing a rectangle. b) Second thought, {subfloat} is ok also for me. It's consistent with {float}. subcaption without float may go to {caption} and {minipage} if needed-it's not a different concept. c) There's also rotation and resizing/scaling. \includegraphics belongs to the same package but is not synonym to that. If there's some doubt, we do not have to hurry. – Stefan Kottwitz Feb 27 '11 at 23:28
• @lockstep: I made {subfloats} a master tag and {subfloat} and {subfigure} to synonyms. {drawing} and {graphics} are still pending--still there's time for suggestions or actions. – Stefan Kottwitz Feb 28 '11 at 18:11
• @Stefan: Thanks -- and let's take one`s time with drawings vs. diagrams (!). – lockstep Feb 28 '11 at 21:45
• @lockstep: {drawing} is already gone. – Stefan Kottwitz Feb 28 '11 at 22:49