11
$\begingroup$

Navigating MO, it is possible to view two kinds of questions regarding errors within a book. The first kind are community-wiki questions which answers are a collaborative listing of found errors in a book (e.g.: Errata to Principles of Algebraic Geometry, Errata for Atiyah-Macdonald, Erratum for Cassels-Froehlich, etc.).

The second kind are questions that are more specific, concerning a doubt of the OP in a certain passage of the book (e.g.: A possible mistake in Walter Rudin, "Fourier analysis on groups"). The answers for this kind of question may or may not result in the discover of an error in the book.

Nevertheless, since both these two kinds of questions could be useful for a future compilation of an errata of a book or an entire errata database, it would be acceptable to create a new tag for these questions?

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It would be acceptable, but at the same time I do not think it would be a usefull tag. $\endgroup$ – user9072 Mar 2 '16 at 11:07
  • $\begingroup$ If you have identified two different but related types of questions, why not propose two different tags, which would allow them to be distinguished? $\endgroup$ – jwg Mar 4 '16 at 12:27
  • $\begingroup$ @jwg I think for the perspective of one who is constructing an errata it would be better to identify the two questions by the same tag. $\endgroup$ – Shamisen Mar 4 '16 at 13:36
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Yes, this seems to be a great idea. Modern means allow this and - a dream - to construct a future database of errors. I had the chance to be trained with books with very very few errors and I can measure the value of such a database (be it in favour of the authors or not). $\endgroup$ – Duchamp Gérard H. E. Mar 6 '16 at 10:23

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .