# What should the D&D Tags be without an ampersand (&)?

I just noticed that the tags don't allow the ampersand. This leaves the tag D&D4 as dd4. What should we label D&D as?

• dand
• dungeons-and-dragons
• d-and-d

Edit: In response to Robert's answer we would obviously convert the version tags to the same format.

• Doing markup like && and \& doesn't work. Is there a meta-tagging discussion somewhere that tells how to put amps in a tag? – Ron Aug 19 '10 at 21:04
• I found the answer. See the comments in Erik's answer. – Ron Aug 19 '10 at 21:43
• the original question created a [dd] tag that was edited away. [dd] is now floating, questionless, on meta.rpg... – yhw42 Aug 19 '10 at 23:30
• dd4.0, dd3.0, d3.5, etc works for me. – RS Conley Aug 20 '10 at 3:24

DnD perhaps?

...........

• And use DnD4, DnD3.5, etc. for things that are specific to each version. – yhw42 Aug 19 '10 at 20:56
• I like the [DnD] option. It's easier than [D-and-D] and clearer than [dd]. Special characters (&, !, #, /) are barred from titles and tags because they can't be put into a URL. The system dynamically builds URLs based on what you are trying to do. For instance, check out the URL when you click on a tag... – Ron Aug 19 '10 at 21:42
• +1 on DnD, instead of DD. It seems more natural, as when one says "D&D", it's pronounced "DnD". – adamjford Aug 20 '10 at 0:27
• Except that tags don't display capitalized. Is [dnd] as nice/clear? – Robert Cartaino Aug 20 '10 at 3:26
• I'd prefer DnD myself. Why don't we just see what rises to the top and then promote that? DD now makes me think of bras thanks to @Richard! – Iain M Norman Aug 20 '10 at 14:21
• Since tags are always lowercased, [dnd] makes me think of "Do Not Disturb" right away no matter what context it's used in. It's also not as discoverable to new users since [d&d] will autocomplete to [dd] when they're asking questions. – Agent_9191 Aug 21 '10 at 3:38
• Aha. I think the autocomplete issue is the clincher for me. I don't mind [dnd], but if a new user will get [dd] when they type [d&d], that's going to be easier for them. – Bryant Aug 23 '10 at 18:36
• This answer seems to be the will of the people we will proceed down this path. – C. Ross Sep 9 '10 at 17:12
• We could always create a [dd-perhaps-you-meant-dnd-instead] tag. – kodi Sep 9 '10 at 19:01

I already see a lot of version-specific questions tagged [dd3.5] [dd4.0], etc.

So to stay consistent, I would suggesting sticking to [dd], in the generic case.

• I like the way it is currently. – Jack C Buel Aug 19 '10 at 20:45
• This is working quite well. Haven't seen much\any mis-tagging issues. – Präriewolf Aug 19 '10 at 20:46
• While it is working quite well, it can be easily changed (moderator retagging tools). Still makes sense to wait and see I think. – C. Ross Aug 25 '10 at 15:11

those should cover the major variants.

I actually am OK with dd -- does it conflict with anything?

• It makes me think of a bra size more than an RPG. – LeguRi Aug 19 '10 at 20:33
• @Richard Thank you for firmly corrupting that tag for me. – C. Ross Aug 19 '10 at 22:14
• Despite certain unfounded chat accusations, I have not ever edited [dnd] to [dd]! I don't think I have, anyhow. My personal crusade is [dm] -> [gm]. ;) – Bryant Sep 6 '10 at 17:08

I recommend using full names when possible for search purposes.

It's probably too late since the dd, dd3.0 etc. tags are well ensconced. However, I still think dnd, dnd3.0 etc. are better.

As a data point, #dnd is the well-known hash-tag for D&D discussion on Twitter. It does occasionally have comical overlap with the Do Not Disturb people, though. =D