Posted under Tags
BUR #52698 is pending approval.
create implication variations -> multiple_views
Variations, according to the wiki, should mean the pose stays mostly the same but there are still multiple instances of the same character in the image. Unless that somehow disqualifies a post from being tagged with multiple views, having the former implying the latter makes sense to me.
not multiple views
trapster77 said:
not multiple views
Isn't the third example misusing the tag? The wiki says characters.
i'd say the post violates the letter, but not the spirit of the tag. see variations no_humans. for example in post #5909938, a fighter jet isn't a character, but these are variations.
The character's pose and basic appearance should stay mostly the same, with only one aspect of their appearance changing
As such, the wiki makes it so the tag has a very specific definition. I actually made clothes variants to adress certain cases outside of the wiki definition, like post #7573875.
The way people actually use variations, however, seems to be quite different that what the wiki suggests and I guess that's the result of only reading the tag name and not the wiki. Or maybe people just don't care and they just tag what they feel is right.
So we have several options here:
We already have costume chart and clothes on and off.
finalwar said:
We already have costume chart and clothes on and off.
costume chart: post #10216000
clothes on and off: post #9223184
As you can see, those two tags don't really fully cover clothes variants.
