Posted under Tags
-1, As long as shoes with geta teeth are also getting tagged geta this implication can't be made. Example: post #2251996
NWF_Renim said:
-1, As long as shoes with geta teeth are also getting tagged geta this implication can't be made. Example: post #2251996
Then those shoes should be only tagged loafers and geta_teeth, right?
There is no geta_teeth tag, and it's hard to justify creating one just for oddball cases like this.
Awhile ago I believe I had once proposed potentially creating a geta_shoes tag for various shoes that have geta and tengu-geta teeth, but I believe such a tag would still implicate geta. Geta as a tag in usage is essentially the "geta_teeth" tag, regardless of how the wiki currently defines it.
sorry to hijack this, just dropping clog_sandals. it bothers me what's the difference from geta but it only appears that people are apparantly not familiar with the japanese term. so if you may, i'm proposing the alias clog_sandals to geta. however, some would argue not all clog_sandals are geta. so if there's a need to, an implication instead would still be fine. thanks.
albert said:
I suggest just implicating it to shoes then.
-1, as there are boots (such as post #1102219) under the tag. Shoes and boots are currently being kept separate.
edit: Once I checked the tags, realized a geta_shoes tag wouldn't work due to "shoe" being in the name. Using "footwear" in the name would be too generic as well. Perhaps for shoe/boot type geta a nontraditional_geta tag be created to cover them? Whether that implicates geta is another question though.
Updated
