  An important endeavor in computer science is to understand the expressive
power of logical formalisms over discrete structures, such as words. Naturally,
"understanding" is not a mathematical notion. This investigation requires
therefore a concrete objective to capture this understanding. In the
literature, the standard choice for this objective is the membership problem,
whose aim is to find a procedure deciding whether an input regular language can
be defined in the logic under investigation. This approach was cemented as the
right one by the seminal work of Sch\"utzenberger, McNaughton and Papert on
first-order logic and has been in use since then. However, membership questions
are hard: for several important fragments, researchers have failed in this
endeavor despite decades of investigation. In view of recent results on one of
the most famous open questions, namely the quantifier alternation hierarchy of
first-order logic, an explanation may be that membership is too restrictive as
a setting. These new results were indeed obtained by considering more general
problems than membership, taking advantage of the increased flexibility of the
enriched mathematical setting. This opens a promising research avenue and
efforts have been devoted at identifying and solving such problems for natural
fragments. Until now however, these problems have been ad hoc, most fragments
relying on a specific one. A unique new problem replacing membership as the
right one is still missing. The main contribution of this paper is a suitable
candidate to play this role: the Covering Problem. We motivate this problem
with 3 arguments. First, it admits an elementary set theoretic formulation,
similar to membership. Second, we are able to reexplain or generalize all known
results with this problem. Third, we develop a mathematical framework and a
methodology tailored to the investigation of this problem.
