Posted under General
It's rather difficult to make a distinction based on the material. Nearly all drawn pantyhose and thighhighs which aren't see-through brown, especially the white ones, look as if they were made of rubber or latex. Someone even tagged post #739446 latex_thighhighs.
unicogirl said:
It is rare that artists even draw the seam line on pantyhose, but it real life it isn't uncommon for pantyhose to be colorful and non-sheer. So unless someone is looking for great detail I doubt they will draw colorful pantyhose sheer, as just going with solid is easier and pretty much people will assume they are either pantyhose or tights.
I agree with this. I suppose the automated tagging scheme with thighhighs, leggings and pantyhose exists because most images are too ambiguous and lacking detail to identify the material.
This is a tricky one, as it requires a certain degree of domain knowledge and a certain degree of reading the artist's mind. On the other hand, I rather dislike destroying information. A lot.
So how about changing the alias to an implication for now, take stock of the situation, and go from there. It's hard to know ahead of time whether tights -pantyhose is worth the effort, or if a pool is a decent short-term solution, etc.
I don't suppose a sheer legwear tag would nullify the need to de-alias these two? As stated above, making a hard, universal distinction between the two is impossible because artists don't always provide the necessary detail. On a similar note, the current leggings tag seems to be defined as the proposed tights tag's definition anyway, even though modern usage seems to lean towards defining them as ending somewhere near the calf or ankle.
Regarding it as an issue purely of length seems to be the most practical solution here.
pantyhose for all legwear that is either shown to cover the legs entirely up to the waist or is assumed to when the feet and waist are covered
leggings for all legwear that meet at the waist but cut off below the knee, perhaps including pantyhose-like varieties of toeless legwear (post #977341)
bike shorts for all legwear that meet at the waist but cut off above the knee
Bloodletter said:
I don't suppose a sheer legwear tag would nullify the need to de-alias these two?
Yeah, this would be my preferred solution. If the difference is in the material, why not tag the material? This way it can still be searched for those inclined to do so without having to sacrifice a general catch-all tag.
So use sheer_legwear as an umbrella tag, and only tag pantyhose if they are clearly pantyhose?
That would work.
As far as I can see modern and danbooru usage is:
It should be noted all of these refer to reasonably tight legwear only, and the aliases exist because the differences are too small/too hard to see on danbooru/not worth differentiating/have ways to refine searches on them.
I think it's fine as it is, bar maybe some wiki updates, and the sheer legwear solution is good if we want to differentiate things like tights/pantyhose amongst others.
I don't think Pantyhose should be the umbrella tag, mostly. If its clear that they are pantyhose (which is pretty easy to determine in a lot of cases), then it can be added, and Pantyhose can implicate sheer legwear or whatever we decide to call it.
I'm confused.
Sheer legwear sounds like it should be used when the fabric is clearly sheer (aka, slightly see through). The pantyhose/tights tag refers to a style of legwear which covers feet to waist. Why should a style of legwear implicate a type of fabric? Not all pantyhose/tights are sheer.
Right, Sheer is the wrong term.
We should call the umbrella tag skin-tight_legwear, alias most of the terms to it, and then have Pantyhose implicate it.
alegria said:
Why should a style of legwear implicate a type of fabric?
That's apparently what American English does; pantyhose implies sheer tights, which is why it was aliased (not worth differentiating, often hard to tell the sheerness of fabric on danbooru images, and they are the same thing in British English).
The confusion this alias causes for a lot of users, or the de-aliasing would for the others, seems to be what this thread is all about.
alegria said:
Not all pantyhose/tights are sheer.
Which is why a specific sheer legwear tag was proposed for tights(=pantyhose) that clearly are.
i.e. tights American English would consider pantyhose, without the confusion these 2 words bring, and the added niceness of it being able to be applied to other legwear types.
On second thought though, I think this adds about as much, if not more, confusion as it is meant to solve.
Instead, how about just de-aliasing them and having pantyhose imply tights? They can after all be considered a widely known subset of tights; those with sheer fabric.
This allows searching:
Alternatively we could differentiate them by color instead, which is likely what the majority of users do anyway.
