Donmai

[REJECTED] Skirt/Pant suit

Posted under Tags

user 525419

create implication skirt_suit -> skirt
create implication pant_suit -> pants

Link to request

In the topic where the implication to suit was suggested it wasn't asked if an implication to skirt and pants should be created (topic #5347).
According to the wikis of those two tags, it seems that pants or skirt are obligatory for those tags and the two tags should therefore imply skirt or pants.

Potential question:
What if the girl wears shorts instead of pants?
I see no exception in the shorts pant_suit search, though.

EDIT: This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 60 days.

EDIT: The bulk update request #1268 (forum #134938) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.

Updated by DanbooruBot

Reply
BrokenEagle98

The above tags would need to be clarified/cleaned up before the above can go into effect.

I've tagged pant suit even if it isn't apparent that the character is wearing pants in that picture. I instead use the meta-knowledge on that character and the fact that they are usually depicted in pant suits, so when you see the familiar jacket from that outfit, I just assume pant suit even if the pants aren't fully or even partially visible.

I'll give an example... Nishizumi Shiho.

The above also applies to skirt suits. Even if it's even visible, unless the visual on the bottom extends down far enough, it's indistinguishable from pants or shorts.

Reply
BrokenEagle98

hazknight said:

Yeah, tag what you see. Meta-knowledge shouldn't be used to tag things that are completely not visible in the image.

Not always... look no further than the gender-specific tags.

Chiera said:

But shouldn't you use just the suit tag in these cases?
I think tag what you see > tag what you expect and therefore I would tag the first example only with suit and omit the pant_suit tag.

Yeah, but you didn't address my second example. Those could be shorts or pants. If the bottom of the image was cropped a little more, it could even be a skirt. However, do we leave something untagged like that just because we cannot 100% visually identify an item...? It's clear that she's wearing some kind of bottom. How do we represent this?

Reply
user 525419

BrokenEagle98 said:

Not always... look no further than the gender-specific tags.

Yeah, but you didn't address my second example. Those could be shorts or pants. If the bottom of the image was cropped a little more, it could even be a skirt. However, do we leave something untagged like that just because we cannot 100% visually identify an item...? It's clear that she's wearing some kind of bottom. How do we represent this?

I think you could in such cases just extrapolate and just assume that she wears's pants.
Sounds contradictory, but it is extremely uncommon that this would be shorts and visually it seems that she is still wearing pants. I think it's safe to tag those "cowboy_shot" images with pants, too.

Reply
user 525419

BrokenEagle98 said:

^Differences of opinion aside... <__<

Back on topic, before this alias is to go in effect, some tag gardening of skirt suit and pant suit will need to take place...

I just cleaned up the pant_suit search, so there should be no posts left that are tagged the wrong way (maybe some exceptions that I missed :3).
Not sure if the same needs to be done with skirt_suit search. I looked through the first pages and it seems that this search is tagged much more accurate.

Reply
1