The tag is currently applied to nine questions:

  • Four of them use it to describe mounted disks
  • Five of them use it to describe audio sound levels

Tags with multiple meanings are barely more useful than no tag at all.

Any suggestions on which of these should be renamed, and to what?


I don't think we need a tag, as it looks like is sufficient.

I went through the posts and made some edits:

  • Where volume referred to audio levels, I added the already-existing tag
  • Where volume referred to mounted disks, I added the already-existing tag

Once I'd done that, it appeared that Jeff was right that we may not need the volume tag at all, so I removed it from each.

Should be added to the blacklist?

  • Please notice volumes are not necessarily hard drives: they can be CDs, pen drives, DMGs, etc.
    – o0'.
    Mar 2, 2011 at 16:30

3 Answers 3


I'm not sure this tag needs to exist at all. Would anyone browse just questions with ? For what purpose? Under what circumstances?

I think and are better general tags.


Perhaps break it out to...

  • audio-volume (Maybe sound-volume is more common?).
  • disk-volume, which isn't very common, but I've seen it used here and there.
  • data-volume, which can be used for questions about managing hard drive space.

It would be nice if there was a default we could place via the tag wikis, but 4/5 is too close to call


What are the down sides to allowing 'volume' to be used both ways? If am looking for audio-style volume, then I can search for 'volume'. Then I see that it is ambiguous when I see the results, and I add another tag "audio" to further limit the scope. I hope it's not a knee-jerk reaction that a tag should not have two different but specific meanings (think homonym)

  • A tag should not have more than one meaning. Tags are meant to catergorize content, not place it in arbitrary buckets. Jun 9, 2011 at 16:24

You must log in to answer this question.

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