I feel that this tag is not needed. Whenever it has been used so far, it's also accompanied with the tag for the render engine. Such as cycles yafaray freestyle. Shouldn't we just get rid of it? See for yourself: rendering
-
2$\begingroup$ it can be useful.. say for discussing rendering techniques/theory etc.. $\endgroup$– iKlsRCommented May 23, 2013 at 3:27
-
$\begingroup$ @iKlsR good point. $\endgroup$– DanielCommented May 23, 2013 at 3:30
-
$\begingroup$ @iKlsR but I think that if a question has a rendering engine tag, that it shouldn't have the rendering tag. $\endgroup$– DanielCommented May 23, 2013 at 3:34
4 Answers
-
$\begingroup$ I personally prefer this option, by the way. $\endgroup$ Commented May 23, 2013 at 3:30
We should keep the rendering
tag.
Although many questions regarding rendering are specific to a particular engine, there are still a good number of questions that might arise independent of the rendering engine, or questions that ask for comparisons between the different engines. Also, there are a number of features of the rendering process that are general enough that even if the user is working with one engine, the answers might still be useful in a different engine (such as speed/optimization questions).
-
1$\begingroup$ Also, since tag nesting is not currently supported, if I'm looking for wide-range questions on rendering, I wouldn't want to go through all tags, having one is helpful $\endgroup$– JNFCommented May 23, 2013 at 21:37
We should keep the rendering, but remove it from every question that already has a rendering engine tag.
-
$\begingroup$ why do you have two different answers? $\endgroup$– iKlsRCommented May 23, 2013 at 3:32
-
-
3$\begingroup$ @iKlsR, I've seen this done quite often on several different other SE sites I'm a part of, mainly just to make it easy for the community to choose the option they like best. $\endgroup$ Commented May 23, 2013 at 3:35
-
3$\begingroup$ @Dan the Man, no, you can't get rep from the meta site. $\endgroup$ Commented May 23, 2013 at 3:35
-
$\begingroup$ @PeterCassetta Ah ok. Didn't know. $\endgroup$– DanielCommented May 23, 2013 at 3:36