I'd say neither if all you're referring to is the chain leash (since that's all I'm seeing). Would fall under BDSM, though. Think you'd need to define where collar and leash or collar and chain is supposed to go, and go from there.
As a note though, if you have this defined as bondage then does that not run afoul of lumping bondage under restrained? A character with a collar and chain, or collar and leash doesn't necessarily have to have anyone hold the chain/leash and could even have the person wearing the collar and leash offering it up to another person or the viewer (similar to a dog bringing you their leash to go for a walk).
Maybe it's just me, but I really don't think things like post #1734975, post #341632, post #185937, or post #666179 are bondage or that they should be tagged bdsm. Sure bondage play involves restraints, and even utilizes rope and the like to restrain people, but saying every single one of them is sexual in nature by slapping on the bdsm tag is just absurd. As long as bondage implicates bdsm, I can't say I can agree at all with lumping tied_up into bondage. I'd much rather see ribbon_bondage lose the bondage implication, or given the way you're trying to use bondage, have bondage lose the bdsm implication.
I also don't think things like post #103574 should be considered bondage, at least in the sense of if the restraint itself is sexual in nature. There are at least 3 concepts being lumped under the "bondage" label right now. There is (1) erotic restraint/bondage (specifically intended for sexual purposes) +/- sexual situation , (2) non-erotic restraint/bondage (binding/restraining an individual) + nonsexual situation, and (3) non-erotic restraint/bondage + sexual situation. Due to the fact that bondage implicates bdsm, the 2nd category is always incorrect if it is placed under the bondage tag. Depending on how you define what classifies as bondage also determines where the 3rd category falls, whether in or out of the bondage heading. If it is whether the restraint itself is sexual in nature, then only category 1 falls under bondage, but if you're saying it's the restraint being sexual in nature or being restrained in a sexual situation, then its the 1st and 3rd categories. Of course the 3rd category either way would still likely always fall under the bdsm tag, so it's not like if they got labelled as tied_up they couldn't still get tagged bdsm in my mind.
I don't really see the problem with having bdsm on something like post #1704791 or post #1656672. I definitely don't think that restricting bondage to the restraint itself being sexual in nature is a good idea: there's nothing sexual about the restraint in something like post #1740398, but it's definitely bondage.
If I was making the decision I'd say to use bondage for all three of your cases, and if someone wants to distinguish case 2 from the others, that's what ratings are for. I'd also favor keeping the bondage -> bdsm implication even though it will result in bdsm on some clearly safe posts.
I think the only thing we'll agree on is to not agree. I'll never agree that every depiction of restraint should get tagged BDSM and you'll keep trying to push that it does, so I'm not going to continue. We'll never reach common ground, thus the only thing to do is take in other voices and see where others stand on the matter.
edit: Examples of the differences
post #562679 body restrained, non-BDSM (nonsexual binding, nonsexual situation)
post #61832 body restrained, BDSM (nonsexual binding, sexual situation)
post #1704791 body restrained, BDSM (sexual binding, nonsexual situation[?])
post #1207916 body restrained, BDSM (sexual binding, sexual situation)
post #1685719 hands bound, non-BDSM (nonsexual binding, nonsexual situation)
post #1419167 hands bound, BDSM (nonsexual binding, sexual situation)
post #430675 collar and leash, nonsexual situation
I don't actually think that every depiction of restraint should be tagged bdsm, but I'd accept it if it was a side effect of a system with other benefits.
That is, given the impossibility of having all three of these at the same time:
This thread seems to have gotten off the original topic. Are there any objections to the tied_up -> restrained implication?
Perhaps I didn't outright state it earlier, but -1 to this implication. This is how I interpreted the purpose of the tag given most images and the wiki for the tag, but Restrained seems to be specifically to be for "restrained in place" and thus isn't a 100% match up with tied_up, as you can be "tied up" but not "restrained in place."
