Posted under Tags
General rule of thumb I hear is, stirrup legwear is mutually exclusive with barefoot. Neither wiki states this, so I figure it ought to be brought up for discussion.
Something I have no frame of reference for is, should single bare foot imply barefoot? Or are those also mutually exclusive? The other single_bare_* tags don't dictate exclusivity in their wikis, but also don't imply any respective tags.
*toeless legwear, not just stirrups. My bad.
While cleaning up the toeless legwear tag, I've run into a slight problem.
The wiki for toeless legwear states to use leggings instead if the whole foot is not covered by the legwear. Currently, the post is tagged fishnet_thighhighs fishnets frilled_bikini frilled_thighhighs single_thighhigh thighhighs toeless_legwear. So just replace thighhigh mentions with leggings, right?
The problem is, there is no tag for frilled leggings. So on top of this cleanup, it would become imperative to sort through frilled thighhighs and other things for such mistags, and populate frilled leggings.
... Or, that's what I would say, if this weren't more elaborate: That's a single frilled legging. Single legging is aliased to single leg pantyhose. So now, I'm concerned I'm missing out on some terminology here. I thought a legging was just the leg, not the hips.
Legwear experts, I implore you to help unfuck this.
baconmeh2 said in forum #452128:
While cleaning up the toeless legwear tag, I've run into a slight problem.
The wiki for toeless legwear states to use leggings instead if the whole foot is not covered by the legwear. Currently, the post is tagged
fishnet_thighhighs fishnets frilled_bikini frilled_thighhighs single_thighhigh thighhighs toeless_legwear. So just replace thighhigh mentions with leggings, right?
The problem is, there is no tag for frilled leggings. So on top of this cleanup, it would become imperative to sort through frilled thighhighs and other things for such mistags, and populate frilled leggings.... Or, that's what I would say, if this weren't more elaborate: That's a single frilled legging. Single legging is aliased to single leg pantyhose. So now, I'm concerned I'm missing out on some terminology here. I thought a legging was just the leg, not the hips.
Legwear experts, I implore you to help unfuck this.
as u can see in the examples in the leggings wiki, the tag is for pantyhose that looks like pants because it doesn't cover the feet. so that post isn't leggings, it's thighhighs because thighhighs doesn't cover above the thighs.
trapster77 said in forum #452130:
as u can see in the examples in the leggings wiki, the tag is for pantyhose that looks like pants because it doesn't cover the feet. so that post isn't leggings, it's thighhighs because thighhighs doesn't cover above the thighs.
Those examples weren't there when I was looking at it. Thanks @evazion.
Specifically thighhighs that don't cover the feet: detached leggings.
Spatula22 said in forum #452133:
Specifically thighhighs that don't cover the feet: detached leggings.
I learned this one a bit late. However, does it invalidate thighhighs? Or is there some kind of thighhigh legging, kneehigh legging, etc?
On another note, how much of the top of the foot must be uncovered to be considered barefoot?
BUR #61873 is pending approval.
create implication single_bare_foot -> barefoot
How do we feel about this? One bare foot = or =/= barefoot?
baconmeh2 said in forum #452144:
BUR #61873 is pending approval.
create implication single_bare_foot -> barefoot
How do we feel about this? One bare foot = or =/= barefoot?
speaking from experience it's probably a bad idea to ask if a tag should imply the other by creating a BUR inside a thread that isn't dedicated to that implication
let's see...
single thighhigh implies thighhighs
single shoe implies shoes
single glove implies gloves
single bare shoulder doesn't imply bare shoulders
single bare leg doesn't imply bare legs
single bare arm doesn't imply bare arms
single off shoulder doesn't imply off shoulder
so "single" tags that say only one part is clothed imply the plural
but "single" tags that say only one part is NOT clothed don't imply the plural
that's the pattern i feel
idk if this is intended or not but it would be better if everything was consistent and if we were to discuss that consistency it would be better to do so in a separate thread about single_* tags. there may be a thread about this already...
trapster77 said in forum #452148:
so "single" tags that say only one part is clothed imply the plural
but "single" tags that say only one part is NOT clothed don't imply the plural
that's the pattern i feelidk if this is intended or not but it would be better if everything was consistent and if we were to discuss that consistency it would be better to do so in a separate thread about single_* tags. there may be a thread about this already...
Good findings on the patterns.
I already checked for a thread on single bare foot, nothing discussed implying barefoot.
trapster77 said in forum #452148:
speaking from experience it's probably a bad idea to ask if a tag should imply the other by creating a BUR inside a thread that isn't dedicated to that implication
Is "and implications" too weak for the title? 
Either way you're probably right, since there appears to be a pattern.
