Requested feature overview description.
The ability to define a tag as lines:soandso and color:soandso. These would be preserved within the image tags description and would be displayed in the Artist category, as, say, "soandso (lines)". The tag would still be an artist one, this wouldn't change its overall type, just its display for this particular image.
Why would it be useful?
It'd let somebody search for, say, only pictures a particular artist lined, or those they only colored.
What part(s) of the site page(s) are affected?
Tagging, image display, search.

Sounds less like a feature request, and more of something that just needs to be debated on whether or not it's a good idea: We already tag both the line artist and the coloring artist, and doubling up on the tags to have artist artist_(colors) isn't a difficult task, but it will result in much larger tagging lists and a lot of constant additional work.

Furrin_Gok said:
Sounds less like a feature request, and more of something that just needs to be debated on whether or not it's a good idea: We already tag both the line artist and the coloring artist, and doubling up on the tags to have artist artist_(colors) isn't a difficult task, but it will result in much larger tagging lists and a lot of constant additional work.

Which is why I want both covered by the same tag, which A: Tags a person as an artist of this work and B: Specifies their role in the piece.

It wouldnt be too hard I guess adding a different colour for that but. A new category? Think this way.

What if an artist who regularly does full pictures colours something in a collab. Now that conflicts.

The tag system would not be able to handle both artist:artist and colourist:artist being the same name.

Using the _(colourist) tag would work in theory but then you split the artist's tag and make it harder to find everything by them.

That said. When someone is only the colourist its feasible you may want to search SPECIFIALLY only for their full original art or search only for their collabs.

It has merit its just hard to say how much its worth balancrd against the headache.

SadPandaInSnow said:
Which is why I want both covered by the same tag, which A: Tags a person as an artist of this work and B: Specifies their role in the piece.

if i understood correctly, this kinda overlaps with the character based tagging which is essentially that people want to be able to assign sub tags for tags. if thats the case, it has already been discussed and cannot be implemented currently without fucking up absolutely everything but maybe in future.

There are a dozen things I think might be useful to have it's own tag category. This doesn't even make it on the list.

GDelscribe said:
What if an artist who regularly does full pictures colours something in a collab. Now that conflicts.

This is EXACTLY the situation this is supposed to cover!

Artist SoAndSo does their own pictures. They are tagged SoAndSo or artist:SoAndSo.

Artist Whozzat does their own pictures too. Those are tagged Whozzat or artist:Whozzat.

Now, those two collaborate. This picture is tagged lines:SoAndSo and colors:Whozzat. These two do not change the global category of those tags (they're still artist:), but on this one picture under the "Artist" heading it will list "SoAndSo - lines" and "Whozzat - color"

Is that clearer?

SadPandaInSnow said:
This is EXACTLY the situation this is supposed to cover!

Artist SoAndSo does their own pictures. They are tagged SoAndSo or artist:SoAndSo.

Artist Whozzat does their own pictures too. Those are tagged Whozzat or artist:Whozzat.

Now, those two collaborate. This picture is tagged lines:SoAndSo and colors:Whozzat. These two do not change the global category of those tags (they're still artist:), but on this one picture under the "Artist" heading it will list "SoAndSo - lines" and "Whozzat - color"

Is that clearer?

The tag code doesn't support this, unfortunately. The artist: part of artist:soandso isn't actually part of the tag. The tag is stored as soandso and the artist: part changes soandso to an artist tag (if it wasn't already). Even if we could somehow save it as two tag types, there's no easy way to differentiate between searching for soandso as an artist and soandso as lines without making it implicit that you always type artist:soandso when searching*.

*This is actually what derpibooru does.

Do we need to know exactly who did what on each image? What about all the images where each artist's role is unknown? Listing this info in the comments or description field would be a lot easier.

BlueDingo said:
Do we need to know exactly who did what on each image? What about all the images where each artist's role is unknown? Listing this info in the comments or description field would be a lot easier.

Need? No, but it'd be nice to have it at a glance and to be bale to search by it.

As for the technical feasibility, pity but understandable.