I just rejected a tag edit for "volume". Obviously this term is ambigeous so the tag should get a description now but a look at the questions with this tag showed me that most questions use it in the sense of filesystem volume, not in the sense of sound volume.
Thus I suggest to use it for filesystems.
Of course, there should be an additional tag for sound volume. But as I am not a native speaker I do not create that myself now but ask more qualified people to make suggestions.
I would argue that volume is a textbook example of a meta tag:
- If the tag commonly means different things to different people, it’s probably a meta-tag. In a cruel, ironic twist, the meaning of the tag [subjective] itself … is actually subjective. Ditto for [best-practices] and [beginner]. Best practices to whom? Beginner by what criteria? These tags are impossible to define by anything remotely resembling an objective metric. In comparison, the the meaning of tags like [java], [c#], and [javascript] are crystal clear to all but the nuttiest of nutbags.
It can mean different things to different people and I can't imagine how it could help experts find questions. Surely nobody is an expert on volume who isn't an expert on audio. And the multiple meanings of volume make it impossible to know if the tag would refer to a filesystem volume or audio volume or something else.
I would therefore suggest burminating volume and replacing it with filesystem-volume and, if needed audio-volume although I think the latter is better served with audio.
volume to filesystem-volume as it appears if you type volume. Should not be a problem and just improve the sutiation. As audio is an "ignore tag" for me I do not have an opinion whether audio-volume would be justified beside audio. In general I would argue that it is precise and does not hurt, thus in case of doubt I would rather have it than not. audio-volume and changed the tag in the audio questions. I prefer fra-san's storage-volume over filesystem-volume. I guess only a moderator can rename a tag. I was just a bit surprised that there is a tag storage which includes RAM... storage-volume is a better choice. 2) again, good point, a synonym does make sense.
volumemay be completely covered by the tagfilesystems.volumealone is too ambiguous, so isn't a good tag. As you correctly point out, it can be used for audio volume or filesystem volume, that's why I don't think it's a useful tag at all. If we want a tag for filesystem volumes, then I thinkfilesystem-volumewould be a better choice.