MO has the tag (stable-homotopy) - it even has some tag-info, although it is just copy-pasted from elsewhere.
Whether or not the tag is actually useful is a question for users who are familiar with this area of mathematics - so I am not being able to help there.
Looking at that discussion, it seems that the tag-info was not really edited since then. There was a suggestion that this should include dimension in ring theory.
I've edited the tag-wiki to include the information about dimension theory from general topology. Perhaps someone, who is more familiar with it, might add something about dimension of ring. Of course, if we see from this discussion that some other meanings should be included, too; we can change the tag-wiki and tag-excerpt. — Martin SleziakNov 28 '12 at 16:06
Um, I am not sure if putting Hausdorff dimension inside dimension theory (topology) is a good one. Are they the same thing @MartinSleziak (I don't know much about dimension theory in topology).
But it seems wrong to have a tag which is both about Hausdorff dimension and Knull dimension. They are completely different things.
@ArcticChar I cannot say that I know enough about dimension theory. Anyway, Wikipedia article on Hausdorff dimension is in the Category:Dimension Theory. And the same article mentions relation to inductive dimension, box counting dimension, etc. I would consider those ones to fit into dimension theory.
Anyway, let's see whether the new tag survives. If there is a separate tag for Hausdorff dimension, this becomes a moot point.
Of course, even if both meaning remain under the same tag, it would not be the only tag which is used in this way. (I.e., the name is used in various areas of mathematics, the remaining tags help to clarify which of them is intended.) It is probably not optimal, but there are a few tags where it was used this way.
@Andrews Arctic Char meant dimension-theory - but I am pretty sure you've gathered that much from the previous messages.
Well, yes - it is clearly if it is decided that the tag should be separated into two tags (one for topological notion of dimension, the other one for ring theory), some retagging will be needed.
Of course, a discussion on meta would be needed before doing so. (And it's possible that the outcome of the discussion might be to use the same tag for both meanings.)
And ~50 about topology, so I would suppose separating this into two tags, dimension-theory-algebra and dimension-theory-topology. And I believe the "The previous discussion you linked to" may be too old to attract attention, so it's better to post a new one.
Yes, I certainly mean new discussion about this. The question is whether somebody volunteers to start the discussion about this on meta.
@Andrews I would expect at least half of the posts tagged dimension-theory fall under the "topological tag". (Not every question about small inductive dimension - to include one example - contains the word "topology".)
If I omit the tags which are most likely to be related with rings/algebra or with linear algebra, I get 391 questions.
This also naturally brings the question whether to have separate tag for dimension in linear algebra/vector spaces. Some past discussion about this issue in this chatroom: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/2165/conversation/…
A discussion in chatroom about tag hausdorff-dimension draw attention to tag dimension-theory again.
Here's some data about how tag dimension-theory is used questions about topology and algebra.
My question:
Should we divide dimension-theory into 2, one for topology, and one for algebra?
Are...
A discussion in chatroom about tag hausdorff-dimension draw attention to tag dimension-theory again.
Here's some data about how tag dimension-theory is used questions about topology and algebra.
My question:
Should we divide dimension-theory into 2, one for topology, and one for algebra?
Are...
Let's hope that some users will join the discussion. (We might expect a knee-jerk reaction from some users to close it as a duplicate of tag management thread, but I think that it is better to have a separate question. Certainly, this needs more space for discussions that comments under an answer in a long thread allow.)
@YuiToCheng Well - as you see from the examples mentioned above - some people are using the tag in this sense. So perhaps we should at least make it clear in the tag info that it is not about dimension in linear algebra and retag the offending posts.
Perhaps removing the questions about dimension in linear algebra from (dimension-theory) might decrease the number of questions in this tag by some 50 or 100 questions. Which would make splitting the tag into two separate tags a bit more manageable undertaking.
I'd guess that if the consensus is that the tag should be split into two, maybe it would be doable with retagging only some 200 questions manually - and the rest could be done by renaming the tag by mods, once the tag contains only question where dimension is used in topological meaning.
But all this planning is perhaps a bit premature - first we need to see whether there is some agreement on meta that the two tags should be indeed separated.
@YuiToCheng Would simply adding this suffice: "Notice that this tag is not intended for questions about dimension in linear algebra."
Perhaps in the tag-wiki it's possible to be more detailed - there we have more space than in the tag-excerpt: "Notice that this tag is not intended for questions about dimension in linear algebra (i.e., dimension of vector spaces and their subspaces)."
Regardless of the outcome of the discussion whether or not the tag should be split into two separate tags, I'd guess we can slowly retag those questions where (dimension-theory) is used for questions about dimension of vector spaces/subspaces, etc. I.e., the meaning from linear algebra.
Yes, that's what I meant. (Sorry if I wrote that in an unclear way.)
This is probably a question for somebody who is familiar with the use of dimension of algebra - if the tag is supposed to be divided into two tags, wouldn't dimension-theory-algebra be almost identical to krull-dimension? What other types of dimension are used for rings?
And as suggested in answer by moderator quid, "if there is a problem with the reviewing of a user, do not hesitate to bring it to the moderators attention. Depending on the nature of the problem, we might get involved. "
Proposal: synonymize lft with mobius-transformation.
They're the same thing.
