I've seen a few issues with the scalie tag, figured it was time to bring them up.

What exactly ought we do in cases like the fluff_snake? Where the creature in question is clearly a snake, but is not scalie - tagging it with snake implies scalie, which is inaccurate, but tagging it only with fluff_snake would hinder searching.

Even if there was a solution for this, the issue comes in with hybrids.

Take this as an example:

post #677142

A hybrid between a snake and a bird, and as such has feathers rather than scaly skin.

As we use it, scalie is effectively synonymous with "scaled skin," (seen clearly in that furred and feathered dragons are excluded from the scalie tag). But scaled skin may or may not be present on a creature of any species. It is strange to both treat it as a species categorization, and to imply species to scalie. We don't imply, for instance, wolf -> fur, or horse -> hooves.

We should consider whether or not scalie ought to be repurposed or perhaps even aliased away to scales or something, which functionally ought to have a pretty similar set of results when searching.

Also fluff snakes are adorable.

post #1257981

Clawdragons said:
I've seen a few issues with the scalie tag, figured it was time to bring them up.

What exactly ought we do in cases like the fluff_snake? Where the creature in question is clearly a snake, but is not scalie - tagging it with snake implies scalie, which is inaccurate, but tagging it only with fluff_snake would hinder searching.

Even if there was a solution for this, the issue comes in with hybrids.

Take this as an example:

post #677142

A hybrid between a snake and a bird, and as such has feathers rather than scaly skin.

As we use it, scalie is effectively synonymous with "scaled skin," (seen clearly in that furred and feathered dragons are excluded from the scalie tag). But scaled skin may or may not be present on a creature of any species. It is strange to both treat it as a species categorization, and to imply species to scalie. We don't imply, for instance, wolf -> fur, or horse -> hooves.

We should consider whether or not scalie ought to be repurposed or perhaps even aliased away to scales or something, which functionally ought to have a pretty similar set of results when searching.

Also fluff snakes are adorable.

post #1257981

Just saying, I've always seen it as more of a body form tag like non lizard characters having skull shape or posture that is reminiscent of a lizard for example or characters not having scales but and are not dragons but commonly described as having a draconian shape...just me and my opinion.

It should be stated that many of those western dragons automaticly implicated to scalie do have hide (skin) rather then scales...

In its existing form it would seem to make sence to invalidate the tag as its furred equivalent, "furry" is already invalidated. the same multipurpose usage, only differing on scales or fur.

PS: that avain snake hybrid looked more like a caricature of a catapiler in the thumbnail to be honest...

It can't be aliased to scales because it includes amphibians, leathery+feathery dinos+dragons, and reptiles drawn without indication of scales. Not really sure what should be done with it. It's odd to have 'scalie' but not 'furry'.

Well, like I've said before, scalie started with this usage: https://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Scalie

Reptiles, dragons, amphibians, dinosaurs, etc regardless of body covering. Which is why the implications exist.

Then someone decided to change the definition to 'has scales', contrary to the common fandom definition.

Personally, I've given up on it. I don't think it's salvageable. Can't alias it, and cleaning it (one way or another) would be too much work.

It doesn't help with scalie, but I think it'd be great to have a tag for an unexpected body surface--for example, a furry snake (OMG! so cute!)... or the fluffy shrimp I uploaded today:

post #1461955

or a scaled canine (though both of these could be tagged as hybrid or.. I dunno, the second has kinda a video game vibe to me.)

post #1442670 post #1440879

just.. something for when you find a scaled cat, a furry fish, a feathery dog, or a hide-covered bird.

I'm fine with scalie including characters with scales, leathery hides, smooth skins, slimy skins, etc. The point of the tag, I suppose, is that the characters do have visible skin/scales and are not completely covered in fur, feathers, (what else?). Obviously, they aren't humans or mammals either. They have to fit some nebulous concept of "does not have a coat (except scales)" characters.

Maybe this is a case where we should just spawn a set of side-species tags for these unusually appendaged variants, like furred_dragon, meaning those snakes should be tagged fluff_snake but not snake because snake implicates reptile which implicates scalie, which is incorrect for fluff_snake. Sometimes I want to tag a post a certain way, but then I trip an implication that conflicts with my plan, so I have to delete a few tags. Same thing with fluff_snake vs scalie, IMO.

Alternatively, implicate fluff_snake to snake, but then reptile would need to be severed from scalie, like how scalie is an opt-in tag for dragons because of furred_dragon.

I think, in this case, it all hinges on whether fluff_snake should be tagged reptile or mammal. Can we please keep reptile and mammal as either/or tags? If one, then not the other (unless hybrid). If a fluff_snake is a mammal, then it shouldn't be tagged reptile too.

abadbird said:
I think, in this case, it all hinges on whether fluff_snake should be tagged reptile or mammal. Can we please keep reptile and mammal as either/or tags? If one, then not the other (unless hybrid). If a fluff_snake is a mammal, then it shouldn't be tagged reptile too.

Vague counter argument: we have no idea what the biology of a fluff snake is. We have our earth rules here on earth, but fluffsnakes don't exist on earth. They could exist in an alterneate dimension or another planet, but whatever it is, we can't firmly say that they're a mammal because they look like a mammal. By that arguement, some dinosaurs on the site should be tagged mammal, just because they look like they might be furry.

post #1404523

... I'd argue that a fluffsnake would be of interest to most people looking up 'snake', and a fair number of people who look up 'mammal'... therefor, I at least would see no problem with it being tagged both.

Alternatively..

I uploaded all the examples in my post: I tagged the furry shrimp as 'shrimp hybrid,' the first dog as great_dane dragon hybrid and the last dog as dog hybrid ... So, obviously, I don't see a problem with tagged a fluffsnake as fluff_snake snake hybrid

That said, while both dogs have scales tagged, I didn't tag scalie.

But that's me and my opinion.

abadbird said:
I think, in this case, it all hinges on whether fluff_snake should be tagged reptile or mammal. Can we please keep reptile and mammal as either/or tags? If one, then not the other (unless hybrid). If a fluff_snake is a mammal, then it shouldn't be tagged reptile too.

I feel like there's not much question about whether or not an otherwise normal but scaled dog should be tagged mammal. The fluff snakes don't look like snake-like mammals, they look like reptiles with fur.