10

The tag is currently used for:

  • the picture kind of images
  • forensic images
  • to 'image' a computer in the sense of writing a disk image to it

And I'm surprised nobody referred to iso(-like) files as images.

I think we should split the tag. Since the bulk of the questions are about "depictions of visual perceptions" (credit to Wikipedia for that nice description) and not disk images, the image tag should probably retain that meaning. We could either make it a tag alias for picture (or some other word) or leave it as is.

As for the questions that are not about a depiction of visual perception, they should probably be retagged appropriately.

I could do the work as I feel like I haven't contributed much to the site in terms of moderation despite having been here a while. How do we go about this: when there is consensus (how is that defined?) someone just goes through the questions and does it? Are there special tools?

1
  • 1
    That quote from Wikipedia sure depicts a visual perception. Sorry, I mean paints a picture.
    – Anders
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 7:56

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
9

I think we should split the tag.

I agree. I propose using for forensic sector-for-sector copies of a storage medium.

Since the bulk of the questions are about "depictions of visual perceptions" (credit to Wikipedia for that nice description) and not disk images, the image tag should probably retain that meaning.

While that is a good description, I don't think it applies to its use here. When we talk of images, we don't talk about visual depictions so much as digital image formats which are used to create images.

We could either make it a tag alias for picture (or some other word) or leave it as is.

I'm not sure it's necessary to alias it to , since image is a common enough word anyway.

How do we go about this: when there is consensus (how is that defined?) someone just goes through the questions and does it? Are there special tools?

The consensus comes from asking a question on meta, just as you have done. If the only upvoted answers are in support of the idea and remain that way for a little while, then you can feel free to go and make the changes yourself. They can always be undone if you make a mistake.

I don't believe there are any special tools. Once you have enough rep, you can create new tags and retag questions. Just create the tag by adding it into any existing question via an edit. The "existence" of a tag is nothing more than a non-zero number of posts using it, so you can create it just by using it. If no one else objects in this meta post, go ahead and make the edits.

15
  • +1 Suggestion for the wording of the [image] tag's usage guidance: "For files or formats containing a digital representation of a visual picture. Not to be confused with [disk-image]". The word "graphics" could also be useful, but I don't see how to fit it in.
    – Mike Ounsworth
    Commented Dec 12, 2018 at 16:13
  • @MikeOunsworth Sounds good, do you want to create it so you get the credit for the text?
    – Luc
    Commented Dec 12, 2018 at 20:37
  • @Luc Done. Though I don't really need the credit :P
    – Mike Ounsworth
    Commented Dec 12, 2018 at 23:22
  • @Luc Do you want to lead the effort to sort through questions tagged image and move them to disk-image or forensic-image as appropriate? (I can throw some man-power into this too)
    – Mike Ounsworth
    Commented Dec 12, 2018 at 23:24
  • 3
    I personally think there is no need for a separate forensic-image, since disk-image includes that. After all, the only difference is why the image is taken. The technique itself is identical.
    – forest
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 0:40
  • @forest Are there circumstances in which memory dumps, archives of files, logs, or other non-disk things could be considered forensic images?
    – Mike Ounsworth
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 2:19
  • @MikeOunsworth No, a forensic image is a bitwise duplication of a storage device/filesystem.
    – forest
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 2:20
  • @forest This is interesting cause it's totally not my field #learning. This definition agrees with you, but wikipedia also mentions memory: "Ideally acquisition involves capturing an image of the computer's volatile memory (RAM)[25] and creating an exact sector level duplicate (or "forensic duplicate") of the media"
    – Mike Ounsworth
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 2:24
  • @MikeOunsworth Now that I think about it, the definition can be applied to a few more things that aren't exactly filesystems, such as images of individual process virtual memory.
    – forest
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 2:27
  • I think that distinctions so subtle that you have to consult Wikipedia and think hard about them when creating your tags are also to subtle for anyone to get them while using the tags.
    – Anders
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 7:58
  • Anyways, I'm happy to help with the retagging.
    – Anders
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 7:59
  • Just notices: There already is a disk-image tag.
    – Anders
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 8:02
  • 1
    Uh, not sure if/how I should have let y'all know that I started retagging. The post had some upvotes and nobody seemed to disagree, and really there weren't that many posts tagged [image] that were about disk-image/forensic-image to begin with (I was starting to wonder whether I should have asked in the first place for a relatively small change). So the retagging is done. As Anders mentioned, there is indeed a disk-image tag now, which I created last night. I also added tag usage texts for the two tags.
    – Luc
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 8:25
  • 1
    As for [forensic-image], I was thinking of that as well, but as forest said, it's the same thing with a different purpose. And there's like two questions in each category.
    – Luc
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 8:25
  • @Luc Ah, of course... I just confused the posted at and modified date, lol.
    – Anders
    Commented Dec 13, 2018 at 9:21

You must log in to answer this question.

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