Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
1 to 6 of 6
A list of arXiv tags are provided on the "ask question" and "edit question" pages. But some of them do not correspond to the tags we actually have.
For example, one of the listed suggested tags is "ca.classical-analysis-odes", whereas in reality the one that we have is "ca.classical-analysis".
Can someone with the power fix that list?
Classical analysis includes ODEs, but also includes other things.
@gerald: I do not dispute that. The problem is that the list of suggested arXiv tags (not the dynamically generated one; the static one) includes [ca.classical-analysis-odes] when the tag that people actually use on this website is [ca.classical-analysis]. So following that will actually create a tag that is not in use.
It is not an issue of what includes what, but an issue of displayed name of the tag not matching up to the one suggested to you on the web form. (Go to this link, scroll down to the input box for "Tags", and read the second paragraph underneath it!)
Personally I would love to have the TagWiki feature from SE2 so that on mouseover, it can say clearly
"ca.classical-analysis : this tag includes classical analysis (including harmonic analysis) and ordinary differential equations."
I've corrected this specific tag. Were there any others?
There's nothing wiki about it though. People would have to come up with descriptions here on meta and I'd have to implement them by hand. But there are also only about 30 arXiv tags, so this wouldn't be terrible. Especially since we already have short descriptions which probably don't need much tweaking.
Thanks, Anton. ca.classical-analysis is the only one I noticed.
Actually, after seeing the implementation, I think we are better off without the mouseover: those who care enough to mouse over will care enough to click the link for descriptions anyway. And it is useless for those what don't .
Ok. I'll leave the mouseover text implemented for just the one tag for now just in case somebody else wants to try it out. If you can think of a better way to implement it, let me know. We might be able to pull it off.