Prior discussions
- topic #109 - Original policy set by site owner (user #1)
- topic #413 - Debate over whether to have *_(cosplay) tags at all
- topic #1230 - More discussion on CHARACTER and CHARACTER_(cosplay) use
- topic #3284 - Discussion on the CHARACTER costume and when the CHARACTER_(cosplay) tag applies
- topic #6003 - Discussion on whether to add CHARACTER onto CHARACTER_(cosplay) tags
- topic #6314 - Proposal for implication CHARACTER_(cosplay) -> CHARACTER
- topic #8281 - Confirmation of CHARACTER_(cosplay) -> CHARACTER
Related discussions
Thoughts
In topic #13004 that I mentioned above, I did a pretty decent breakdown of different tagging schemas. Going by that, we're currently using scheme #1. The scheme being proposed is #2. To nuke all *_(cosplay) tags would be scheme #3. There would be no reason for a hybrid scheme (#4) with cosplay tags.
The following tables were copied from forum #126233 which demonstrate the different search precision between scheme #1 and scheme #2.
Note: The linked Venn Diagrama was used for the following tables: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1UfUTU3vRWfMmvXdFl_lpFCllb6Ve2bkC
Legend
- A: CHARACTER_(cosplay)
- B: CHARACTER
Scheme 1
A implies B
Area desired | Search terms |
---|
1 | Not possible |
2 | Not possible |
3 | {-A B} |
1,2 | {A} |
2,3 | Not possible |
1,3 | Not possible |
1,2,3 | {B} |
Also of note, {A -B} is the null set (i.e. no results), {A B}=={A}, and {~A ~B}=={B}.
Scheme 2
A,B are separate tags
Area desired | Search terms |
---|
1 | {A -B} |
2 | {A B} |
3 | {-A B} |
1,2 | {A} |
2,3 | {B} |
1,3 | Not possible |
1,2,3 | {~A ~B} |
Final
As in topic #13004, I'm in favor of #2 (i.e. the scheme being proposed in this thread) since it offers the best search precision. Besides that, it'll finally do away with that annoying behavior of changing the base tag to a character tag even if accidentally used on a non-character tag, e.g. naruto_(cosplay).