Implicating open_smile → open_mouth
Link to implication
Reason:
Updated by Hudson
Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
Implicating open_smile → open_mouth
Link to implication
Updated by Hudson
-1. open_mouth is too general to represent open_smile, unless "open_mouth smile solo" is tagged.
Updated by anonymous
Lance_Armstrong said:
-1. open_mouth is too general to represent open_smile, unless "open_mouth smile solo" is tagged.
i dont understand? open smiles always include open mouth. there should not be any issues with this implicatiob
Updated by anonymous
Lance_Armstrong said:
-1. open_mouth is too general to represent open_smile, unless "open_mouth smile solo" is tagged.
Uh, this is an implication, not an alias.
Updated by anonymous
Mutisija said:
i dont understand? open smiles always include open mouth. there should not be any issues with this implicatiob
I think the issue is that an implication would mean that "open_mouth" has to also imply that every character with an open mouth is also smiling. The implication works vice versa, like an = equation.
An alias, however, can give another tag to one without making it vice versa. So making "open_mouth" an alias of "open_smile" will not imply that all open mouths are smiling.
Updated by anonymous
Sinwhisper said:
I think the issue is that an implication would mean that "open_mouth" has to also imply that every character with an open mouth is also smiling. The implication works vice versa, like an = equation.An alias, however, can give another tag to one without making it vice versa. So making "open_mouth" an alias of "open_smile" will not imply that all open mouths are smiling.
but we are implying open smile TO open mouth. which means that every image with tag open smile gets tag open mouth, not other way around? im sorry, im just confused because i fail to see any issues here
also alias is used to replace tag with another. we cant replace open smile with open mouth or open mouth woth open smile.
Updated by anonymous
Sorry, I read it as alias.
Updated by anonymous
Whoops, I got it backwards. >.>
Updated by anonymous
This implication (which I support, FWIW) is still unresolved, after straightening out the alias/implication confusion.
Updated by anonymous
imagoober said:
This implication (which I support, FWIW) is still unresolved, after straightening out the alias/implication confusion.
Please allow us to take the time for certain aliases/implications. The admins that are better at this (parasprite/furrypickle) are often busy on other things, and I have yet to grasp the full knowledge on this.
I am currently digging up and resolving older aliases/implications, as well as quick and simple ones, so I will eventually go over them.
Also, I'd rather leave long discussions to admins with more experience (not out of laziness, but to prevent damage to the site from a less-experienced admin).
It also helps if you guys give your (concise) opinion on pending changes and ideas.
Anyway, approved.
Updated by anonymous