Aliasing hand_heart &rarr; hand_<3
Link to alias

Reason:

Fits with the <3 tag.

Wouldn't heart_hands/<3_hands be a better choice?

BlueDingo said:
Wouldn't heart_hands/<3_hands be a better choice?

It's open for debate :P

+1. Standardization seems a good enough argument.

BlueDingo said:
Wouldn't heart_hands/<3_hands be a better choice?

I guess not; hand heart refers to is a "heart" made using the hands, heart hands sounds like hands (or maybe pawpads) in heart shape. If more clarification is necessary we could use '<3_sign'_empty or '<3_gesture'_empty instead.

<3_sign for our pawed friends. Sure.

<3_sign fits with the existing v_sign, so I think it's a good pick.

Kemono-Kay said:
<3_sign fits with the existing v_sign, so I think it's a good pick.

Even more consistency! I'm for it.

Sorrowless said:
<3_sign for our pawed friends. Sure.

If a character's paws are articulate enough to form a heart, they might as well be hands. If that logic isn't good enough for you I also went through all 34 images tagged hand_heart and I didn't find a single one that was made with literal paws instead of hands.

The tag should just be <3_hands...with the plural "hands" because the gesture requires TWO hands to execute.

Also for pictures like these:
post #1139532

I would suggest a special tag for when two characters are using their hands to make either side of the heart. <3_hands_duo would be good.

Also:
Implication: <3_hands -> gesture
Implication: <3_hands_duo -> gesture

Dyrone said:
If a character's paws are articulate enough to form a heart, they might as well be hands. If that logic isn't good enough for you I also went through all 34 images tagged hand_heart and I didn't find a single one that was made with literal paws instead of hands.

The tag should just be <3_hands...with the plural "hands" because the gesture requires TWO hands to execute.

Also for pictures like these:
post #1139532

I would suggest a special tag for when two characters are using their hands to make either side of the heart. <3_hands_duo would be good.

Also:
Implication: <3_hands -> gesture
Implication: <3_hands_duo -> gesture

Fitting in with the *_sign tags would help too, though.

Dyrone said:

The tag should just be <3_hands...with the plural "hands" because the gesture requires TWO hands to execute.

As previously mentioned, there is the possibility of existing heart-shaped "hands".

e.g. post #568958

Putting the word 'heart' or its symbolic equivalent (<3) before the word 'hands' could give the wrong impression that the tag refers to heart-shaped hands, since the construction noun_A noun_B commonly imply noun_A assuming adjective value.

Sincerely, I am in favor of the original suggestion or one of mine.

Dyrone said:
Also for pictures like these:
post #1139532

I would suggest a special tag for when two characters are using their hands to make either side of the heart. <3_hands_duo would be good.

Also:
Implication: <3_hands -> gesture
Implication: <3_hands_duo -> gesture

All the gestures made using two hands either already require two people, or usually are made by one person, but have the possibility of being made by two (e.g. finger_frame, interlocked_fingers, hands_together etc). That said, would be more practical to have a complementary tag with the function of indicating when one of those "ambiguous-number" gestures are made by two people, rather than having a variation for each of them.

Furrin_Gok said:
Fitting in with the *_sign tags would help too, though.

Other boorus use heart_hands...it would help with some level of cross-compatibility if we used a similar tag.

Also...<3_hands is the most specific term available...it describes the exact shape and the body parts used to make said shape...why generalize it with <3_sign?

O16 said:
e.g. post #568958

Your example already has its own tag: heart_paws.

O16 said:
Putting the word 'heart' or its symbolic equivalent (<3) before the word 'hands' could give the wrong impression that the tag refers to heart-shaped hands, since the construction noun_A noun_B commonly imply noun_A assuming adjective value.

I mean if you want to be pedantic about it then <3_sign could literally mean a picket sign with a heart on it, and could then theoretically be mistagged just as easily as <3_hands.

There's no great way to make a tag that is both succinct and has absolutely no chance of being misinterpreted. The tag would have to be something like two_humanoid_hands_with_fingers_articulated_in_a_manner_suggesting_the_shape_of_a_heart.

O16 said:
All the gestures made using two hands either already require two people, or usually are made by one person, but have the possibility of being made by two (e.g. finger_frame, interlocked_fingers, hands_together etc). That said, would be more practical to have a complementary tag with the function of indicating when one of those "ambiguous-number" gestures are made by two people, rather than having a variation for each of them.

How many gestures would such a tag actually apply to though? And I mean...practically...not theoretically. Because I find that often times we get bogged down in these ridiculous discussions about tags only to find the tags in question have only a handful of posts and they really aren't worth worrying over.

O16 said:
As previously mentioned, there is the possibility of existing heart-shaped "hands".

There's also the possibility of an image having a heart-shaped sign in it.

You could go with heart_gesture/<3_gesture, except there's more than one.

Dyrone said:
two_humanoid_hands_with_fingers_articulated_in_a_manner_suggesting_the_shape_of_a_heart

Which one, love heart or organ heart? This tag is too ambiguous.

i am in favour of this alias

BlueDingo said:
There's also the possibility of an image having a heart-shaped sign in it.

That is why I also suggested '<3_gesture', to work around this possibility in case of it be an issue.

BlueDingo said:
You could go with heart_gesture/<3_gesture, except there's more than one.

The word 'gesture' is almost exclusively used referring to hands (this based on human communication), in such a way your examples very improbably would be mistagged.

O16 said:
That is why I also suggested '<3_gesture', to work around this possibility in case of it be an issue.

My earlier point was basically that none of it is going to be an issue. <3_hands, <3_sign, or <3_gesture (yes, gestures are normally made with hands, but if someone saw a monkey making a heart shape with their tail a person might tag that as <3_gesture) ALL have the remote possibility of being mistagged. They all have the same problem...the thing is to pick out the one that sounds best and is most descriptive...which I believe to be <3_hands.

Dyrone said:

Your example already has its own tag: heart_paws.

I) this is not the case of having or not a tag for it, but of people mistagging it.

II) that is why I used quotation marks.

Dyrone said:
I mean if you want to be pedantic about it then <3_sign could literally mean a picket sign with a heart on it, and could then theoretically be mistagged just as easily as <3_hands.

See the first response I gave to BlueDingo.

Dyrone said:
How many gestures would such a tag actually apply to though? And I mean...practically...not theoretically. Because I find that often times we get bogged down in these ridiculous discussions about tags only to find the tags in question have only a handful of posts and they really aren't worth worrying over.

Some examples:

post #1094124 post #32124 post #729414 post #626095

Mostly to 'interlocked_fingers' and 'hands_together', also more rarely to 'steepled_fingers' and 'finger_frame'.

Dyrone said:
My earlier point was basically that none of it is going to be an issue. <3_hands, <3_sign, or <3_gesture (yes, gestures are normally made with hands, but if someone saw a monkey making a heart shape with their tail a person might tag that as <3_gesture) ALL have the remote possibility of being mistagged. They all have the same problem...the thing is to pick out the one that sounds best and is most descriptive...which I believe to be <3_hands.

I) one thing that I don't understood yet, what exactly is the problem with 'hand_<3'?

II) 'heart_tail' wouldn't be tagged as '<3_gesture' for the same reason that users don't tag 'hot_dog' as 'sandwich'. Even if they technically overlap, the technical usage is so distinct of the real one, that practically nullify this possibility (unless someone wants to made such mistag).

O16 said:
II) 'heart_tail' wouldn't be tagged as '<3_gesture' for the same reason that users don't tag 'hot_dog' as 'sandwich'. Even if they technically overlap, the technical usage is so distinct of the real one, that practically nullify this possibility (unless someone wants to made such mistag).

Or because a regular sandwich (with slices of bread) doesn't have another name. If it had a more specific name, chances are we'd be using it already.

O16 said:
I) one thing that I don't understood yet, what exactly is the problem with 'hand_<3'?

Name one other tag that places <3 last (and isn't a mistag).

In this case, "heart" is being used as an abbreviation for the adjective "heart-shaped" just like <3_eyes, <3_censor, etc.

BlueDingo said:
Or because a regular sandwich (with slices of bread) doesn't have another name. If it had a more specific name, chances are we'd be using it already.

Sorry, but I fail at understanding what would be the correlation between this and the fact of people don't mistag it.

BlueDingo said:
Name one other tag that places <3 last (and isn't a mistag).

In this case, "heart" is being used as an abbreviation for the adjective "heart-shaped" just like <3_eyes, <3_censor, etc.

'tail_<3' ('<3_tail' is more used to the feature than to the "gesture", what basically exemplify the explanation that I gave early about the order of the nouns changing the meaning).

Thank you for the elucidation.

Undoing the heart -> <3 alias has been on my radar for a while now.

My reason is there is currently no reliable way to find the actual organ. I'm considering a disambiguation which would include all of these specific tags (heart_eyes, etc).

Thoughts? (I'm probably going to make a separate thread for the resulting clean-up)