I think they all have their place, but their use is not yet well defined.
For palaeography we have in the wiki:
This tag may be used for:
- questions about the study and practice of palaeography
- requests for assistance in deciphering and/or interpreting handwriting
This makes perfect sense. The other two tags have no usage guidance defined, but on some questions seem to be used instead of palaeography.
- Translation & Transcription Request, French birth record from 1842
- Did Edward Buten change his name from Edward Bulen?
- What does this Y symbol abbreviate in a Quaker birth record?
- Reading and interpreting baptismal record (from 1706) in old Danish script?
Is word (like) etus likely to appear on 19th Century Cornwall Will?
- Where can I get help transcribing and translating Danish records?
The 4 transcriptions questions that I think are tagged properly are:
- What tools are available to support transcription on Mac OS X?
- Where is the transcription effort for various census and other large record sets documented?
- Copyright Issues with Content Providers
- What criteria should I look for to publish my cemetery records online?
I don't think any of the above questions should be tagged both palaeography and transcriptions, though it is possible a question could be asked in the future that may need both. A question that could probably be tagged with both: Is there a transcription standard that separates unclear words from added words? I think the distinction between the tags is that palaeography questions tend to be about reading or interpretting a single record or small number of records, while transcriptions questions are generally more broad in scope (not about reading handwriting).
So for the usage guidance for transcriptions I might propose:
For questions about making or using transcriptions of genealogical documents, and transcription practices or projects. For questions about deciphering and interpreting handwriting, use the "palaeography" tag.
Obviously defining it in this way would require a few of the above questions to be re-tagged, but I think it would be easier to do now than at a later stage when transcriptions gets further overused.
translation is somewhat related as a lot of palaeography questions in foreign languages also have this tag. I see no problem with that overlap. I kind of question the usefulness of this tag since it is so vague; it makes me wonder whether it would be better to tag the language instead (or in addition?).
For example, I created the latin tag the other day as I thought this would be useful since a lot of early European genealogical records are in Latin. However, I can see that it might seem a bit silly to tag a question both france and french. At the same time, as the site grows, tagging the language might help French speakers more easily find questions about French palaeography and translations.