Danbooru

Read the rules before proceeding!

Topic: Propose new tag: Undone, and Partially_undone

Posted under Tags

c933103

Currently, there are tags for unfastened, unbuttoned, unzipped and untied, as well as partially_* version of these tags. However, in order to tag and search for images that contain these features, it would be necessary to identify whether the clothes was using zipper, button, or any other fastening technologies to keep the cloth together before it was undid.

Sometimes, the image may not include detail on whether the cloth was supposed to be keep together using zipper or button, like post #2984076, post #2974135, post #2974967, post #2974811, or that the cloth was supposed to be keep together using some kind of unknown technologies. In these cases, it would be hard to tag and search the image as it would be up to the tagger's decision to decide whether it is supposed to be a buttoned cloth or a cloth that use zipper, or the tagger may not tag such image with un*ed tag as all because of lack of clarity regarding which type of method was it supposed to be.

Therefore, I suggest the use of two tag "undone" and "partially_undone" so that all images can be tagged as such even when it is not clear about whether the image was using zipper or button.

  • ID: 142183
  • Permalink
  • iridescent slime

    Does this proposed tag really improve search at all? It seems to me that open clothes already gets the point across. Creating another tag that essentially means the same thing just adds noise.

  • ID: 142201
  • Permalink
  • c933103

    The entropy regarding whether the cloth is partially or fully opened would be lost if open clothes is used instead,

    but if the open clothes tag is taken into consideration, then maybe it would be better to have a partially open clothes to accompany the tag instead?

    And I am not too sure about whether unfastened/unbuttoned/unzipped/untied really imply open clothes

  • ID: 142210
  • Permalink
  • kuuderes shadow

    c933103 said:

    And I am not too sure about whether unfastened/unbuttoned/unzipped/untied really imply open clothes

    They don't because

    open clothes said:

    This implies that nothing is being worn underneath aside from underwear.

  • ID: 142217
  • Permalink
  • iridescent slime

    kuuderes_shadow said:

    They don't because

    open clothes said:

    This implies that nothing is being worn underneath aside from underwear.

    It's funny that that particular clause persists to this day, because none of the tags that implicate open clothes carry this restriction. Open jacket in particular is loaded with fully clothed characters and nothing in it's wiki suggests that this is incorrect usage.

    I wonder if open clothes originated as some kind of particular fetish tag and later metamorphosed into more of a generally descriptive tag.

  • ID: 142224
  • Permalink
  • Provence

    That clause seems awfully stupid. Why was this done?

  • ID: 142226
  • Permalink
  • kuuderes shadow

    Provence said:

    That clause seems awfully stupid. Why was this done?

    I think iridescent slime was on the money. The clause has been there since the wiki page's creation in January 2007. The implications that counteract it are a mere 8 years old.

  • ID: 142227
  • Permalink
  • c933103

    Is it possible to come up with a new tag that express the context of "nothing is being worn underneath aside from underwear" so as to free up the open_clothes tag as a catch all?

  • ID: 142246
  • Permalink
  • c933103

    Something like "skin_underneath" ?

  • ID: 142275
  • Permalink
  • c933103

    Provence said:

    That's already expressed through open_clothes no_bra.

    no_bra mean "no underwear is being worn underneath" not "nothing is being worn underneath aside from underwear"

  • ID: 142290
  • Permalink
  • <<
  • 1
  • >>