Topic: x_bowtie tags

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

Oarebt

Member

The bulk update request #616 is pending approval.

create implication blue_bowtie (0) -> bowtie (340)
create implication red_bowtie (38) -> bowtie (340)
create implication green_bowtie (14) -> bowtie (340)
create implication purple_bowtie (3) -> bowtie (340)
create implication black_bowtie (2) -> bowtie (340)
create implication glitter_bowtie (2) -> bowtie (340)
create implication orange_bowtie (2) -> bowtie (340)
create implication adjusting_bowtie (1) -> bowtie (340)
create alias aqua_bowtie (1) -> blue_bowtie (0)
create alias dark_red_bowtie (1) -> red_bowtie (38)

Reason: <x>_bowtie imply bowtie

dfY6C

Privileged

Some shades of colors generally get aliased to their main color tags, in this case aqua and dark_red. There are existing aliases for other tags for these colors like aqua_eyes -> blue_eyes and dark_red_background -> red_background.

I would recommend editing those 2 lines to instead be:

alias aqua_bowtie -> blue_bowtie imply blue_bowtie -> bowtie alias dark_red_bowtie -> red_bowtie

Oarebt

Member

dfy6c said:
Some shades of colors generally get aliased to their main color tags, in this case aqua and dark_red. There are existing aliases for other tags for these colors like aqua_eyes -> blue_eyes and dark_red_background -> red_background.

I would recommend editing those 2 lines to instead be:

Adjusted the bur!

I have a question from that, if I post something that have a new <color>_<object>, what would be the best way to know if the <color> used is considered a main color?

Is there a list of the main color tags somewhere on the website?
Or, best for now would probably be to check other color tag like <color>_body or <color>_hair, since those probably already have most color and sub-color aliased?

dfY6C

Privileged

kalethorebiter said:
Maybe we should add aqua to the list of invalid colors along cyan.

I added Aqua in there for now but there's actually a slightly annoying thing I just noticed. Both e621 and e6ai alias aqua, cyan, AND indigo to blue but this wiki page that comes from e621 contradicts those aliases by saying Cyan (basically the same color as Aqua) should be tagged as TEAL and Indigo should be tagged as PURPLE, not blue like the aliases would seem to suggest (I just changed the Indigo line to have the additional blue note but I'm not entirely happy with that tbh).

That being said, I think Oarebt doesn't need to change anything in this BUR in regard to that as it would just make the color aliasing inconsistent if we did. I'm just bringing that up as a possible thought for a potential future BUR where maybe we can re-alias some of these color tags like aqua/cyan_x -> teal_x and indigo_x -> purple_x instead of blue if that's something people want to get behind.

Updated

kalethOrebiter

Privileged

dfy6c said:
I added Aqua in there for now but there's actually a slightly annoying thing I just noticed. Both e621 and e6ai alias aqua, cyan, AND indigo to blue but this wiki page that comes from e621 contradicts those aliases.

I'm pretty sure I'll repeat what you just said for the page, but I'm not entirely sure..

Our color page is a port I made from e621 color tag group . So there might be some contradiction I didn't account for. (Personally, I feel like aqua/cyan should be the main color and not teal, but that's beside the point.)

So indigo is really a shade of dark purple, and should not be confused with shades like dark blue or marine blue. I think that aliasing indigo to blue is an error.

One thing we could do is add shade of colors as a bullet list for each colors.

E.g.:

h3. Main Colors

h5. Hues
* [color=#ff0000][b]Red[/b][/color]
** [color=#800020][b]Burgundy[/b][/color]
** [color=#802000][b]Maroon[/b][/color]