Removing implicated tags should also remove the implicator

E.g. removing necktie would remove red_necktie, but not the other way around since there are neckties that are not red.

If there are multiple tags that implicate one tag, deleting that one tag would delete every tag that implicates it. E.g.

-necktie - > -black_necktie -white_necktie

Not only would this be consistent with the law of contraposition, it would also make tag gardening easier.

If there are any valid reasons why this shouldn't be implemented, please enlighten me because I can't think of any.

Removing necktie would not remove red_necktie, it would instead throw an error that necktie could not be removed.

I made a userscript to help with that a while back.

forum #269465

It should show implicated tags as a tree, so it would be easier to visually see tag dependencies.

hdk5 said:

Removing necktie would not remove red_necktie

I believe they are suggesting that to be implemented as the default behavior.

It should not be the default behavior. Some implications are not obvious at first, but make sense once you notice them. Throwing an error would be more preferred in such cases.

hdk5 said:

It should not be the default behavior. Some implications are not obvious at first, but make sense once you notice them. Throwing an error would be more preferred in such cases.

I'm not sure what you're arguing against. The suggestion is that removing a base tag should remove all implicated tags as well. If you're removing necktie because it's wrong, then naturally you're also removing red necktie because obviously it's also wrong. There can't be a red necktie if there's no necktie. It's not an issue of the implications making sense or not.

Maybe this will make it more clear.

If this suggestion is implemented and someone were to add red necktie to a post, it will still add necktie to the same post just like it does now.

However, if you remove necktie from the post, it will also remove red necktie from the same post without you needing to hunt down those implications and remove them directly.

We could also have the error message show a list of implications for the tag and maybe a confirmation prompt to remove them. At the very least, there should be a message stating which tags were removed as a result of implications.

blindVigil said:

I'm not sure what you're arguing against. The suggestion is that removing a base tag should remove all implicated tags as well. If you're removing necktie because it's wrong, then naturally you're also removing red necktie because obviously it's also wrong. There can't be a red necktie if there's no necktie. It's not an issue of the implications making sense or not.

I am thinking of stuff like food or weapon or jewelry that not everyone might agree on definitions of.
Another case is, the implying tag might be a smaller detail and might not be quickly noticeable on the image.
In other words, if tag A implies tag B, me removing B from the image because I didn't know that A is a subtype of B or didn't notice that A is present on the image should not automatically remove A

it should at least go up the chain and tell you what the top is instead of just saying "go find the implication", there are cases where there's a 3+ deep implication chain that are annoying