For stories relating to: how text is laid out an Discussion: should it include e.g. stories about <a href=“https://lobste.rs/search?q=pango&what=stories&order=relevance” rel=“ugc”>Pango</a>? <a href=“https://lobste.rs/search?q=unicode&what=stories&order=relevance” rel=“ugc”>Unicode</a> (partially relevant to typesetting/typography I suppose)? These are a bit further from “typsetting” but is relevant to typography and encoding? Should it include stories about markup languages? See searches for e.g. <a href=“https://lobste.rs/search?q=latex&what=stories&order=relevance” rel=“ugc”>LaTeX</a>, <a href=“https://lobste.rs/search?q=typst&what=stories&order=relevance” rel=“ugc”>Typst</a>, <a href=“https://lobste.rs/search?q=typography&what=stories&order=relevance” rel=“ugc”>typography</a>, <a href=“https://lobste.rs/search?q=postscript&what=stories&order=relevance” rel=“ugc”>PostScript</a>, <a href=“https://lobste.rs/search?q=pandoc&what=stories&order=relevance” rel=“ugc”>Pandoc</a>, etc. and some misc stories like <a href=“https://lobste.rs/s/3fxml1/let_s_write_pdf_file_2015” rel=“ugc”>Let’s write a PDF file</a>. I wouldn’t be the one filtering things out, but I could see how to some people, the way text is presented on paper/screens might not be that interesting compared to more typical programming/computing topics. I think if we figure out the scope properly it shouldn’t be much additional complexity. I’m not familiar with the tag-submission process so please correct me if there’s anything I’m missing!