6

In its current definition, has partly the same definition as and part 'accessing defined data from larger datasets'. I'd like to either kill the entire tag or have it just mean the second thing.

update: It is done. I created a new for the questions that need it.

1
  • 3
    Nuke from orbit, its the only way to be sure.
    – joojaa
    Oct 19 '16 at 10:57
3

The "or" doesn't make any sense to me. Theres absolutely no reason at all to have a tag with two completely unrelated meanings.

There are no not many questions using the tag for the second "data-extraction" meaning (maybe this, which looks off-topic and confusing) and I'm not sure that has all that much to do with graphic design anyway. There are a few questions that are talking about using CC's "Extract Assets" feature, which I don't think fits in either description.

So, if we're going to do anything with it: remove the "or..." from the description and make it a synonym of and retag existing questions. Or better yet...

Kill it.

6
  • I disagree on the 'there are no questions' part. There are multiple questions using 'extracting' as a tag for, say, getting a measurement from a curve already drawn or a font from a .pdf.
    – Vincent
    Oct 25 '16 at 10:17
  • 1
    Well, I can only find 2 but yeh I guess so. "accessing defined data from larger datasets" is a bit ambiguous, I wouldn't fit measurements in to that definition but that's just arguing semantics.
    – Cai
    Oct 25 '16 at 10:37
  • That's weird. I found at least 5... Let me search again.
    – Vincent
    Oct 25 '16 at 11:22
  • I wasn't looking that thoroughly so I probably just missed them
    – Cai
    Oct 25 '16 at 11:25
  • I'd vote to convert 'extraction' to 'background-removal'; and add 'data-extraction' to all the (5?) questions we are stumbling over now.
    – Vincent
    Oct 25 '16 at 12:48
  • Seems like a reasonable course of action
    – Cai
    Oct 25 '16 at 12:50

You must log in to answer this question.

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