Do we want discipline-specific tags?

Question

There's a proposed edit somewhere that would create an "engineering" tag. I don't see any value in such discipline-specific tags, myself. I suspect that at the level of creation of documents, then I (as a mathematician) could learn a lot from the chemists and others around here. Even if I don't want to typeset H_2 SO_4 all that often, the techniques used to do it could be useful for typesetting, say, the Riemann curvature tensor (yes, yes, I know).

So my inclination would be to reject this edit. However, I can well imagine that there are reasons for such tags that I've not thought of (having spent all of 20s thinking about it). So if anyone would like to argue in favour, or more strongly against, I think it would be useful to see those arguments. Thus:

Is there a use for such tags?

(The question in question, for those who like a concrete example, is Drawing Mechanical Systems in LaTeX)

Answer 1

I think tags for less obvious fields like linguistics and chemistry make sense since there are some packages that are very peculiar to thoses fields, or the kinds of questions are quite specifically related to things in the field itself. On the other hand math(s), computer-science, physics etc. make little sense, since they are assumed to be the primary fields of latex usage. So I certainly wouldn't get rid of the linguistics tag (of course being a linguist, I'm biased) but at the same time I wouldn't start a campaign to add field tags to everything.

Answer 2

Sort of as closing remarks (posted as an answer rather than an edit so that people can vote it up or down if so desired). In light of the answers so far received, it seems that there are people who would use these tags. That's good to know.

However, in light of the fact that there is a limit on the number of tags on a question and that tags (particularly discipline tags) can be seen as exclusive as well as inclusive (so engineering could be interpreted as meaning "Mathematicians need not apply"), I would ask that discipline-specific tags be used with a modicum of caution.

(I don't want to draw up a list of dos and don'ts for these - I don't see the point. If we get loads of them then it may be worth revisting the issue but until then, I'm happy to let it be.)

Answer 3

What's the harm? Would you learn less from an H_2 SO_4 post if it answered a question tagged [chemistry]?

I lean towards thinking that if some engineers would not visit the site regularly except that they would keep track of the engineering tag's RSS feed and come here from that, then the tag is doing the site some good.

Answer 4

I think this kind of tags can be useful, as they help grouping questions and answers especially relevant for people working in the same discipline.

I am an engineer and I'm always interested in seeing how to use LaTeX for creating graphics as they are commonly used in my field of work. (And up to now I've seen quite few examples which are really centered on technical drawing with dimensioning, sketches, etc.)

For sure, there are things that are useful to nearly everyone (equations, e. g....), but often the different disciplines have a different focus and a slightly different point of view on the same things. The same is true for conventions, e. g. technical drawings (to take an example from the engineering field).

So I would find it useful to tag such specific contents to be easily grouped and help people find them.

That's why I suggested this "engineering" tag.