How should the tag be used? In particular, should it be used together with , should it be used exclusively of , or does it depend on questions?

Currently, I fail to see any difference between the questions tagged as and the questions tagged both as and . Many questions are actually given all of these three tags.

If there is a guideline how to apply these tags to questions about graph algorithms, it is probably better to explain it in tag wiki.

  • $\begingroup$ I suppose you can't make the tag a synonym for [ds.algorithms] + [graph-theory]. So maybe you should just leave it as it is. It's also possible some questions should be tagged [data-structures] and [graph-theory], but not [graph-algorithms]. We should say something about this in the tag wiki. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 21, 2010 at 23:02
  • $\begingroup$ @Peter: Thanks for the comment. (1) I also suppose that we cannot make a synonym for a combination of tags. (2) I understand that presumably there are questions which are related to algorithms and graph theory but are not about graph algorithms. (3) I do not know what to write in tag wikis about which tags to use for questions about graph algorithms. To be honest, it is tempting to write: “For questions about graph algorithms, people seem to choose arbitrarily to tag them as some or all of [ds.algorithms], [graph-theory] and [graph-algorithms].” $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 21, 2010 at 23:16

1 Answer 1


In general, we need the most specific tag relating to the question. So I can easily imagine graph-algorithms being more specific than graph-theory. Also, ds.algorithms is special in that it's an arxiv tag, and we have desired as far as possible to keep at least one arxiv tag for each question. So I'd say the main distinction is between graph-theory and graph.algorithms, and the wiki for graph-theory could say something like

If your question pertains specifically to algorithms on graphs, you should use the more specific

and the wiki for graph-algorithms could say something like

This tag is specifically for algorithms on graphs. For more general graph theory questions, please use

ds.algorithms itself should emphasize that it's an arxiv tag, with something like

ds.algorithms is a component of the arxiv cs.ds categorization, and should be used on all questions that relate to the design and analysis of algorithms. While the design and analysis of data-structures also includes algorithms, the more specific should be used for those questions. For algorithms in computational geometry for example (which has its own top-level tag , algorithmic questions should use both ds.algorithms and cg.comp-geom.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sounds reasonable to me. If there are no other opinions in a while, I can edit the tag wikis. Of course anyone interested and having enough rep can go ahead. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 22, 2010 at 12:44

You must log in to answer this question.

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