Viewing last 25 versions of post by UnderwoodART in topic General Tag Discussion

[@Background Pony \#52BA](/forums/tagging/topics/general-tag-discussion?post_id=5235299#post_5235299)
I understand where you're coming from, and I do agree to a degree. In the future I will ignore "invisible implications", like tagging unicorns with horn, etc. Obviously I shouldn't search for wings if I want a pegasus, but a winged yak needs both tags, since a name for that doesn't exist.

However, I disagree about certain design signifiers, like coat and mane colour. Yes it's redundant for very well known characters like Twilight, but if I want to find an OC design with a green body and yellow hair just for aesthetic's sake, there is no other way I would find them. And what if I can't find that one secondary character--you know the one--green maybe, dreadlocks, everyone calls her a stoner? By maximising tags, you maximise the chance people will find what they're looking for, and that is their entire purpose.

You seem to be implying a pyramid method of "the more something is known, the less it needs to be tagged", which I think I can support, but that inherently comes with ambiguity for anyone not privy to this information. Background Ponies will see an OC tagged with coat, mane, etc. and apply it to the screencap they're uploading.

It's almost like we need primary and secondary tags; primary for those overarching categories you can navigate and secondary to detail every aspect of an image for search results. But then you're getting into Google-levels of coding.

As far as the 'wall of tags' goes, I kind of feel like we need nesting for implied tags, so you would see the `wings` tag, then hover over it for a drawer including `large wings` and `spread wings`, etc. Then you could have a `pony design` tag, or something, which nests mane, coat, and eye colour. And in regards to the wall of tags on derpi events, you could have `included characters` and `included artists` drawers, and suddenly its not 5 pages long anymore. Yes it would still open up a lot, but only if you want to see them.

**Unrelated addition:**
Is there anything in place to handle multiple characters using the same name? `oc:angel` is a very popular name, and it is almost impossible to find a specific artist's OC amidst the variety. Should popular names be tagged with its creator, for example, `oc:angel (daimo)`, while still implying the greater tag?

[@Background Pony \#52BA](/forums/tagging/topics/general-tag-discussion?post_id=5235299#post_5235299)
I understand where you're coming from, and I do agree to a degree. In the future I will ignore "invisible implications", like tagging unicorns with horn, etc. Obviously I shouldn't search for wings if I want a pegasus, but a winged yak needs both tags, since a name for that doesn't exist.

However, I disagree about certain design signifiers, like coat and mane colour. Yes it's redundant for very well known characters like Twilight, but if I want to find an OC design with a green body and yellow hair just for aesthetic's sake, there is no other way I would find them. And what if I can't find that one secondary character--you know the one--green maybe, dreadlocks, everyone calls her a stoner? By maximising tags, you maximise the chance people will find what they're looking for, and that is their entire purpose.

You seem to be implying a pyramid method of "the more something is known, the less it needs to be tagged", which I think I can support, but that inherently comes with ambiguity for anyone not privy to this information. Background Ponies will see an OC tagged with coat, mane, etc. and apply it to the screencap they're uploading.

It's almost like we need primary and secondary tags; primary for those overarching categories you can navigate and secondary to detail every aspect of an image for search results. But then you're getting into Google-levels of coding.

As far as the 'wall of tags' goes, I kind of feel like we need nesting for implied tags, so you would see the `wings` tag, then hover over it for a drawer including `large wings` and `spread wings`, etc. Then you could have a `pony design` tag, or something, which nests mane, coat, and eye colour. And in regards to the wall of tags on derpi events, you could have `included characters` and `included artists` drawers, and suddenly its not 5 pages long anymore. Yes it would still open up a lot, but only if you want to see them.

**Unrelated addition:**
Is there anything in place to handle multiple characters using the same name? `oc:angel` is a very popular name, and it is almost impossible to find a specific artist's OC amidst the variety. Should popular names be tagged with its creator, for example, `oc:angel (daimo)` while still implying the greater tag?

[@Background Pony \#52BA](/forums/tagging/topics/general-tag-discussion?post_id=5235299#post_5235299)
I understand where you're coming from, and I do agree to a degree. In the future I will ignore "invisible implications", like tagging unicorns with horn, etc. Obviously I shouldn't search for wings if I want a pegasus, but a winged yak needs both tags, since a name for that doesn't exist.

However, I disagree about certain design signifiers, like coat and mane colour. Yes it's redundant for very well known characters like Twilight, but if I want to find an OC design with a green body and yellow hair just for aesthetic's sake, there is no other way I would find them. And what if I can't find that one secondary character--you know the one--green maybe, dreadlocks, everyone calls her a stoner? By maximising tags, you maximise the chance people will find what they're looking for, and that is their entire purpose.

You seem to be implying a pyramid method of "the more something is known, the less it needs to be tagged", which I think I can support, but that inherently comes with ambiguity for anyone not privy to this information. Background Ponies will see an OC tagged with coat, mane, etc. and apply it to the screencap they're uploading.

It's almost like we need primary and secondary tags; primary for those overarching categories you can navigate and secondary to detail every aspect of an image for search results. But then you're getting into Google-levels of coding.

As far as the 'wall of tags' goes, I kind of feel like we need nesting for implied tags, so you would see the `wings` tag, then hover over it for a drawer including `large wings` and `spread wings`, etc. Then you could have a `pony design` tag, or something, which nests mane, coat, and eye colour. And in regards to the wall of tags on derpi events, you could have `included characters` and `included artists` drawers, and suddenly its not 5 pages long anymore. Yes it would still open up a lot, but only if you want to see them.

**Unrelated addition:**
Is there anything in place to handle multiple characters using the same name? `oc:angel` is a very popular name, and it is almost impossible to find a specific artist's OC amidst the variety. Should popular names be tagged with its creator, for example, `oc:angel (daimo)`?

[@Background Pony \#52BA](/forums/tagging/topics/general-tag-discussion?post_id=5235299#post_5235299)
I understand where you're coming from, and I do agree to a degree. In the future I will ignore "invisible implications", like tagging unicorns with horn, etc. Obviously I shouldn't search for wings if I want a pegasus, but a winged yak needs both tags, since a name for that doesn't exist.

However, I disagree about certain design signifiers, like coat and mane colour. Yes it's redundant for very well known characters like Twilight, but if I want to find an OC design with a green body and yellow hair just for aesthetic's sake, there is no other way I would find them. And what if I can't find that one secondary character--you know the one--green maybe, dreadlocks, everyone calls her a stoner? By maximising tags, you maximise the chance people will find what they're looking for, and that is their entire purpose.

You seem to be implying a pyramid method of "the more something is known, the less it needs to be tagged", which I think I can support, but that inherently comes with ambiguity for anyone not privy to this information. Background Ponies will see an OC tagged with coat, mane, etc. and apply it to the screencap they're uploading.

It's almost like we need primary and secondary tags; primary for those overarching categories you can navigate and secondary to detail every aspect of an image for search results. But then you're getting into Google-levels of coding.

As far as the 'wall of tags' goes, I kind of feel like we need nesting for implied tags, so you would see the `wings` tag, then hover over it for a drawer including `large wings` and `spread wings`, etc. Then you could have a `pony design` tag, or something, which nests mane, coat, and eye colour. And in regards to the wall of tags on derpi events, you could have `included characters` and `included artists` drawers, and suddenly its not 5 pages long anymore. Yes it would still open up a lot, but only if you want to see them.

[@Background Pony \#52BA](/forums/tagging/topics/general-tag-discussion?post_id=5235299#post_5235299)
I understand where you're coming from, and I do agree to a degree. In the future I will ignore "invisible implications", like tagging unicorns with horn, etc. Obviously I shouldn't search for wings if I want a pegasus, but a winged yak needs both tags, since a name for that doesn't exist.

However, I disagree about certain design signifiers, like coat and mane colour. Yes it's redundant for very well known characters like Twilight, but if I want to find an OC design with a green body and yellow hair just for aesthetic's sake, there is no other way I would find them. And what if I can't find that one secondary character--you know the one--green maybe, dreadlocks, everyone calls her a stoner? By maximising tags, you maximise the chance people will find what they're looking for, and that is their entire purpose.

You seem to be implying a pyramid method of "the more something is known, the less it needs to be tagged", which I think I can support, but that inherently comes with ambiguity for anyone not privy to this information. Background Ponies will see an OC tagged with coat, mane, etc. and apply it to the screencap they're uploading.

It's almost like we need primary and secondary tags; primary for those overarching categories you can navigate and secondary to detail every aspect of an image for search results. But then you're getting into Google-levels of coding.

As far as the 'wall of tags' goes, I kind of feel like we need nesting for implied tags, so you would see the `wings` tag, then hover over it for a drawer including `large wings` and `spread wings`, etc. Then you could have a `pony design` tag, or something, which nests mane, coat, and eye colour. And in refegarenceds to the wall of tags on derpi events, you could have `included characters` and `included artists`, and suddenly its not 5 pages long anymore. Yes it would still open up a lot, but only if you want to see them.

[@Background Pony \#52BA](/forums/tagging/topics/general-tag-discussion?post_id=5235299#post_5235299)
I understand where you're coming from, and I do agree to a degree. In the future I will ignore "invisible implications", like tagging unicorns with horn, etc. Obviously I shouldn't search for wings if I want a pegasus, but a winged yak needs both tags, since a name for that doesn't exist.

However, I disagree about certain design signifiers, like coat and mane colour. Yes it's redundant for very well known characters like Twilight, but if I want to find an OC design with a green body and yellow hair just for aesthetic's sake, there is no other way I would find them. And what if I can't find that one secondary character--you know the one--green maybe, dreadlocks, everyone calls her a stoner? By maximising tags, you maximise the chance people will find what they're looking for, and that is their entire purpose.

You seem to be implying a pyramid method of "the more something is known, the less it needs to be tagged", which I think I can support, but that inherently comes with ambiguity for anyone not privy to this information. Background Ponies will see an OC tagged with coat, mane, etc. and apply it to the screencap they're uploading.

It's almost like we need primary and secondary tags; primary for those overarching categories you can navigate and secondary to detail every aspect of an image for search results. But then you're getting into Google-levels of coding.

As far as the 'wall of tags' goes, I kind of feel like we need nesting for implied tags, so you would see the `wings` tags, then hover over it for a drawer including `large wings` and `spread wings`, etc. Then you could have a `pony design` tag, or something, which nests mane, coat, and eye colour. And in reference to the wall of tags on derpi events, you could have `included characters` and `included artists`, and suddenly its not 5 pages long anymore. Yes it would still open up a lot, but only if you want to see them.