There are 120 questions tagged ne555 and 0 questions tagged with 555timer.
I don't see the usefulness of these tags. Should they be merged with 555?
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
1
5 Answers
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
6
I would think 555timer is the most descriptive and should be the main tag. If there are no objections I'll merge them with 555timer
-
9\$\begingroup\$ Hi, I haven't tried to investigate but FYI this previous Meta question (which unfortunately is mainly about doing things with the I2C / TWI tags) mentions some 555 tag-related stuff, mainly in this answer. Personally I would not use "555timer" as the master tag - we don't use 741opamp or 7400quadnandgate so why 555timer? I would stick to just the IC number, as I think that is what has become the standard for other IC tags. 555timer and ne555 should be synonyms. \$\endgroup\$– SamGibson ModCommented Apr 20, 2022 at 11:00
-
3\$\begingroup\$ I agree with @SamGibson to follow the other IC tag conventions, but am not bothered either way. I just noticed what appear to be duplicates and wanted to bring it to attention. \$\endgroup\$– JYeltonCommented Apr 20, 2022 at 16:43
-
2\$\begingroup\$ Update to my previous comment after spending a few more minutes reviewing: It turns out that we do have an existing "741-opamp" tag (I looked for "741opamp" which is why I didn't find it when rushing to look earlier). I still don't think that we should include the IC function in a tag name (any tag) and the 7400 tag (to stick with that earlier example) doesn't include any function text in the tag name. Perhaps we need to decide that point first i.e. should tag names include text like "timer" "opamp" "adc" etc (and, if necessary, schedule tags like "741-opamp" to be changed to just "741"). \$\endgroup\$– SamGibson ModCommented Apr 20, 2022 at 21:47
-
1\$\begingroup\$ The "timer" suffix would only be useful if there was an entirely different use for 555 that we needed to distinguish it from. Same argument for "741-opamp". I'd agree on just using the IC number part. \$\endgroup\$– FinbarrCommented Apr 21, 2022 at 8:03
-
\$\begingroup\$ When you merge, if you type in 555 it would rename it to 555timer, which would be clarifying. When you say 555 it's almost always accompanied by the word timer \$\endgroup\$– Voltage Spike ModCommented Apr 22, 2022 at 14:00
-
\$\begingroup\$ @VoltageSpike a 555 has many 'off-label' uses where it does not function as a timer at all. Many years ago I designed a small-run product using the 555 as a kind of window comparator. \$\endgroup\$– brhansCommented May 1, 2022 at 8:11
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
I think using the proposed '555' tag is the most inclusive, so, sure, might as well merge them.
(What would Colin McRae do? What a ‘555’ tag may look like.)
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
2
I see the most voted here is saying to put 555timer tag, but that`s not good because its not only a timer, it can be used as frequency divider , in counters, etc. the problem in merging into a 555timer tag is that every time a person will open a post and try to put 555 as a flag and only encounter 555timer then the person will create a 555 only tag.
and also by seeing that the 555timer tag already exist and it haves 0 topics, one can see that people creating topics already have this option as a tag and they are choosing to not using it. so it's not a good tag at all. the person wanting to put 555 and timer in flags can just put these two as separate flags. because also theres timers that don't use 555.
-
\$\begingroup\$ Just FYI, the reason your text is being formatted as code is that you're using the wrong 'single apostrophe' character. You should be using ' which is typically next to " on your keyboard, but instead you're using ` which is typically over near ~. \$\endgroup\$– brhansCommented May 1, 2022 at 8:06
-
\$\begingroup\$ edited, yeah it was the accent is because in abnt2 layout the ' is on the position that sits the ` accent in the us layout. i use both so, sometimes i dont notice that is on the other layout and gets the other symbol. \$\endgroup\$– bigubrCommented May 1, 2022 at 22:35
\$\begingroup\$
\$\endgroup\$
14
No, we shouldn't. There's 555 questions that are explicitly about the CMOS variants, and nothing else. Most questions only refer to the 555 as concept, not to the NE555 BJT implementation.
555timer and ne555 are not synonyms.
-
2\$\begingroup\$ I am glad you pointed that out; however I still do not see the use case for having tags for the variants. Is it likely that someone would search/follow one but not the other? \$\endgroup\$– JYeltonCommented Apr 20, 2022 at 16:39
-
\$\begingroup\$ hm, fair point, but I'd say in this case, merging the two would actually merge things that have a useful distinction so far, so yes, I can see a case where I'm looking for an answer to link to that uses a CMOS 555. In that case I'd look for
[555] -[NE555]first, and only after not finding it that way look at the much more mixed-bag-of-quality ne555 tag. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 20, 2022 at 18:26 -
7\$\begingroup\$ You're more optimistic than I am about authors of questions using the correct tag! :) \$\endgroup\$– JYeltonCommented Apr 20, 2022 at 18:54
-
\$\begingroup\$ I do have an optimistic view on the folks relentlessly editing these questions... You do have a point, though. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 20, 2022 at 19:25
-
\$\begingroup\$ Isn't the NE555 drop in compatible with the LM555? Yeah, they don't have the same characteristics: apogeeweb.net/circuitry/… but you could use one in place of the other? \$\endgroup\$– Voltage Spike ModCommented Apr 20, 2022 at 20:11
-
\$\begingroup\$ it's not about bipolar devices like LM555 but about devices like the TLC555 or the MIC1555 \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 20, 2022 at 20:18
-
\$\begingroup\$ Are not all of these devices drop in compatible but varying in functionality? \$\endgroup\$– Voltage Spike ModCommented Apr 20, 2022 at 22:26
-
1\$\begingroup\$ Couldn't we just tag the relevant questions with both "555" and "CMOS"? \$\endgroup\$– FinbarrCommented Apr 21, 2022 at 8:05
-
1\$\begingroup\$ @VoltageSpike nope, not drop-in compatible. Different speeds, voltages, drive strengths \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 21, 2022 at 8:43
-
\$\begingroup\$ @Finbarr point is: currently we have two tags. The questions under these two tags are meaningfully distinct. I.e., seeing one tag and not the other actually carries information. Merging these two tags removes information from the tag system. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 21, 2022 at 8:44
-
\$\begingroup\$ I realise that, but we don't have tags for e.g. 74HC00, 74HCT00, 74LS00 as well as 7400. Does the number of use cases specific to the CMOS variant justify another tag? \$\endgroup\$– FinbarrCommented Apr 21, 2022 at 9:00
-
\$\begingroup\$ @Finbarr I do agree that this is a super special case. If the tag was to be created today, I'd also vote for not having it separate. But as it is, yes, the reality of the two tags carrying information after having been around for years justifies keeping both. There's 877 questions with 555, but without ne555, but only 72 with ne555 but without 555; things aren't symmetrical. Yes, most ne555 questions are 555 questions, but simply not the other way around. Subsuming all under one tag loses a lot of useful data on questions. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 21, 2022 at 9:07
-
1\$\begingroup\$ @MarcusMüller, wouldn't it only lose data on that part of the ne555 that are actually, specifically, about NE555, and not about 555 in general? And is that a distinction that's actually worth keeping anyway if the question text specifies which 555 they mean etc.? Tagging all questions on 555s with ne555 would seem wrong, yes. \$\endgroup\$– ilkkachuCommented Apr 21, 2022 at 11:02
-
1\$\begingroup\$ @ilkkachu that would be the case if ne555 wasn't kind of an indicator of ... "on average, not as great a post"; it's been a while, but in the wake of this I looked up the average scores tags through SE Data explorer, and things weren't great. Often, excluding ne555 yields to better results. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 21, 2022 at 13:31
ne555on this question. \$\endgroup\$