Tag discussion: kneehighs and socks

edit: originally for
striped_kneehighs -> striped_socks
It seems that the striped_socks tag is dominated by kneehighs (or socks that are below the knee cap), and I've only seen few image where the socks are ankle / shin length.

You click one image and you have

• striped_kneehighs
• striped_socks
• kneehighs
• socks
• striped

Unless there is a clear reason to have both tags that relate to sock length.

Also?

vertical-striped_kneehighs -> vertical-striped_socks

As long as we keep both the kneehighs and socks tags, we should probably have that apply to their variations too. Might just need tag cleanup rather than an alias or anything like that.

so go through striped_kneehighs and remove which tag?

Hmm, well, yeah. I guess thats the question. Does striped kneehighs need to be both striped socks and socks. I suppose so, even if it's getting pretty silly by that point.

now I'm confused...

The sock tags are a total mess. Socks appears to be used for multiple lengths of socks so unless we want to disambiguate them based on lengths having both striped_kneehighs and striped_socks on the same post isn't incorrect.

yeah...
unless everyone can look at this chart post #342378

should socks go mid-calf and below, while kneehighs go under and above the knee?

Made a typo in my previous post, meant "Does striped kneehighs need to be both kneehighs and socks."

So, basically, do we use socks as a catch-all (with implications) for the various lengths or define it strictly as under-shoe footwear of the shorter type, with no implications and being mutually exclusive.

Maybe exclusivity is best. It's not like thighhighs get socks.

I want to clear up the tag, but I am not sure how to start

Well, didn't really get any discussion related to my question of how we define socks.

I guess I wouldn't mind letting anything below the knee have socks applied, but that's just the way I think of "socks" personally.

sorry, I'm still thinking about it, and would like more post besides my personal view.

If you go by the definition, then knee highs wouldn't be connected to socks (due to certain material) and would lean more toward hosiery. But for this site... hmm it seems like socks would remain regardless. But when tagged for certain images it seems redundant and confusing.

On another note, that chart image has "over-knee", would that work as an added tag for kneehighs?

I think the sock tag honestly needs a lot of work. Right now the definition makes it sound like anything can be tagged a sock regardless of length. The big problem though is the two different ideas on how to use the tag, one basing it on length (ie shorter than knee) or basing it on material. Basing it on material though is used less often than those who use it for length, and it's simply too hard to go by material because artists don't provide enough detail more often than not to determine what it's made out of.

I think going by length is the easiest approach, though I'm sure that approach will run into problems with images that have something that looks very clearly like a sock that is of thighhigh length.

What was this about using "over-knee"? I've actually tagged a few images with over-kneehighs where the stocking just went above the knee a bit but not as high as thighhighs probably would.

Well, length is how we determine thighhighs regardless of material so applying it for socks could work too.

So sock = below the knee or midway up the calf - it's a minor difference, either works for me.

Go with mid-calf and below for socks, and kneehighs for directly below the knee and directly above it. So socks will no longer be attached to kneehighs? Unless people get confused with loose socks.

I thought this image was here.
Another image about length

unicogirl said:
I thought this image was here.
Another image about length

Here you go post #86570.

I'd rather not combine socks that are just below the knee and just above the knee, frequently the above the knee one will be tagged thighhighs while just below the knee will not. At minimum people see a distinction enough that they should not be combined.

NWF_Renim said: I'd rather not combine socks that are just below the knee and just above the knee, frequently the above the knee one will be tagged thighhighs while just below the knee will not. At minimum people see a distinction enough that they should not be combined.

Agreed, it's tough to distinguish above the knee and thighhighs most times.

Still thinking about this. hee

Should it be treated like guitar and bass_guitar? separate except when they are in the same image?

unicogirl said:
Should it be treated like guitar and bass_guitar? separate except when they are in the same image?

Honestly, guitar and bass guitar shouldn't be that way. It's fairly ridiculous that I have to remember if there were four or six strings on the instrument when I'm trying to find an image, when there's almost no visual difference, and half of them are mistagged anyway.
If I had the time I'd populate the electric guitar tag and request for bass guitar to imply guitar just as all the other guitar tags do.

... Which is a totally off-topic rant, sorry about that. For socks I guess separation would be fine? :-\

Was there a topic about that? Guitar?
Cause I think it would be good to categorize them as such.

I don't mind going through the socks/kneehigh tags and breaking them apart, I just want to make sure if others have additional ideas I can work with.

zatchii said:
Honestly, guitar and bass guitar shouldn't be that way.

While I agree with you, the bass guitarists here strongly refused to be categorized with the regular guitarists, and so now the tags are separate. There was a pretty hot-headed debate in the forum here a while ago. It's clearly more of a political decision that anything rational.