5

After editing the wiki for (which I assumed to be about the European Convention on Human Rights) I noticed that both question so tagged are about the European Court of Human Rights. Both institutions have the acronym ECHR. Wikipedia mentions ECtHR as an alternative for the court, but I've never seen that in use.

So what do we do? I'd prefer to have a longer tag, but spelling the court out is probably to long.

| |
  • 2
    I'm not entirely sure hence offering this only as a comment for now, but since the Court operates as a result of the Convention (I think), it's probably not wrong to consider the Convention the broader topic. In that sense, questions about the Court being tagged with the Convention doesn't strike me as a problem. N.B. there's also a council-of-europe tag. – Fizz Mar 7 at 2:40
8

I disagree with the previously accepted answer as to the names of the tags; these tags would be misleading given that the court and the convention are not EU institutions, but institutions of the Council of Europe.

If we decide that the expanded versions of the acronyms should be used, then the correct tags should probably be and , which maintain the correct adjective (EU vs. European) and also the correct acronym (convention on human rights vs. human rights convention).

However, IMO both of these tags are too long and needlessly specific. I propose instead that as the two institutions are intrinsically linked, that there is no need for a tag disambiguation - should remain, and the tag info should contain a reference to this intended usage.

| |
  • "both of these tags are too long" is that actually a problem? Compared to ambiguity? – Braiam Mar 12 at 15:46
  • 3
    As of 2017, tags can be 35 characters, and these are 30 and 35. So they're long, but not necessarily too long. – Bobson Mar 12 at 23:20

You must log in to answer this question.

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