The tag implication #42336 leashed_collar -> leash has been approved.

Reason: There's a leash and a collar. When the leash is attached to the collar, it becomes leash_and_collar. If there was no leash visible, it wouldn't be tagged leash_and_collar.

It might also make sense to implicate leash_and_collar to collar, for the same reason. But a collar might be hidden from view while the positioning of the leash implies that a collar must be there. Not sure whether that should be tagged collar then, and not sure whether it should be tagged leash_and_collar. Examples:
Tagged collar and leash_and_collar:
post #2718316
Not tagged collar:
post #2995525 post #2993229 post #2982743 post #2383965

I'm also gonna use this opportunity to ask whether leash_and_collar should apply when a leash is attached to a collar, but nobody is wearing that collar. Like this:
post #2995349 post #2269129

EDIT: The tag implication leash_and_collar -> leash (forum #319357) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

mononatriumglutamat said:
It might also make sense to implicate leash_and_collar to collar, for the same reason. But a collar might be hidden from view while the positioning of the leash implies that a collar must be there. Not sure whether that should be tagged collar then, and not sure whether it should be tagged leash_and_collar.

IMO, if you can't see the least and collar, it shouldn't be tagged leash and collar.

mononatriumglutamat said:
I'm also gonna use this opportunity to ask whether leash_and_collar should apply when a leash is attached to a collar, but nobody is wearing that collar.

I'd say yes. If the point of the tag is to indicate the leash and collar are connected instead of separate, it isn't really relevant whether someone's wearing the collar, or holding the leash like in
post #2986394

I might also suggest renaming the tag to something like leashed_collar, as when I first saw leash_and_collar it came across as meaning there's a leash and there's a collar in the image, without meaning they're necessarily connected (which would make the tag unnecessary). Being leashed_collar helps clarify it means the two are connected rather than just there.

watsit said:
I might also suggest renaming the tag to something like leashed_collar, as when I first saw leash_and_collar it came across as meaning there's a leash and there's a collar in the image, without meaning they're necessarily connected (which would make the tag unnecessary). Being leashed_collar helps clarify it means the two are connected rather than just there.

I'll have to get back to this one, but yes, changing the tag to leashed_collar sounds good to me.
There's also leash_collar, which is somewhat ambiguous (aka is it a collar made out of a leash?).

The tag implication leash_and_collar -> leash (forum #319357) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

see topic #35632 for implying collar as well

...

can we get a better name for this? I like leashed collar

The bulk update request #4478 has been rejected.

create alias leash_and_collar (0) -> leashed_collar (8507)

Reason: It’s basically the same thing

EDIT: The bulk update request #4478 (forum #361796) has failed: Error: Alias would modify other aliases or implications through transitive relationships. (create alias leash_and_collar -> leashed_collar)

EDIT: The bulk update request #4478 (forum #361796) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #4478 (forum #361796) has failed: Error: Alias would modify other aliases or implications through transitive relationships. (create alias leash_and_collar -> leashed_collar)

The bulk update request #4478 (forum #361796) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.