Tag Implication: ;d -> wink

Implicating ;d -> wink.
Implicating ;d -> smile.
Implicating ;d -> open_mouth.

Reason: Similar to :d, but also implies wink.

Would it be possible to have it implicate :d instead of doing the smile and open_mouth implications, since :d already implicates those? Or is :d to be completely different from ;d?

Is there much difference between ;d and :d wink?

I actually thought ;p had been aliased away already with forum #29911, but it seems not.

zatchii said:
Is there much difference between ;d and :d wink?

Yes there is, because you could have one character winking and another with the :D smile.

NWF_Renim said:
Would it be possible to have it implicate :d instead of doing the smile and open_mouth implications, since :d already implicates those? Or is :d to be completely different from ;d?

I don't know, but we haven't established a precedent for that on similar tags like ;p or ;q (that is, they don't implicate :p or :q, only wink and tongue)

EB said:
Yes there is, because you could have one character winking and another with the :D smile.

You could, certainly, but I'd question if it's common enough to matter. About one per page of results, from what I can see.

Tagging expressions is a pain on posts with a lot of characters.
Tags like open_mouth get meaningless when they concern a minority of the characters in the image (more than hair/eye color I believe), and that's where the combo tags get extremely useful.

Done