Should we handle the tag as a tag for the app itself, or as a synonym for (which, in my opinion, should be )?

  • 1
    Just to add to this, the protocol is also called "BitTorrent" and the Wikipedia page for BitTorrent is for the protocol, not the product or company. – GAThrawn Feb 18 '14 at 13:12
  • @GAThrawn Aaah, that is quite confusing. The author of the bittorrent protocol also named his bittorrent client as bittorrent. – geffchang Feb 18 '14 at 13:31
  • However, based on usage among regular users, I think more would consider torrent to be the protocol, and bittorrent as the app. I suppose we can live with this assumption. @GAThrawn – geffchang Feb 18 '14 at 13:33
  • There's an implied follow-up here, which no one has addressed: if we say bittorrent is about the protocol, and is pretty much a synonym for torrents, then what do we call the tag relating to the app? – Dan Hulme Mar 18 '14 at 19:32
  • @DanHulme bittorrent for the protocol, bittorrent-app for the app? – onik Mar 20 '14 at 9:58

Torrent would rather refer to the file (see Torrent file), and thus again would be confusing. Moreover, this is the context this word is most commonly used, IMHO (if one "downloads a torrent", he's not downloading a protocol).

Checking Wikipedia on "torrent" doesn't mention "torrent" as protocol, only "BitTorrent" (a peer-to-peer file sharing (P2P) communications protocol).

Conclusion: clearly refers to the protocol, though an application by the same name does exist.


clearly refers to the application, as a Google search result will show.

And yes, I agree that is preferable over . But I don't agree that a protocol should be a synonym of the application, because there are several other applications that can handle torrents as well.

You must log in to answer this question.

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