Posted under Tags
Short of searching/negate searching hundreds of tags, there's no current way to search for posts that contain or don't contain text. I propose either text be undeprecated(which would likely require said hundreds of implications to it), or the creation of a new tag for the total lack of text in a post(no artist names, no "in universe" text such as signs or such, etc), likely something like no_text.
Pokeball99 said:
Short of searching/negate searching hundreds of tags, there's no current way to search for posts that contain or don't contain text. I propose either text be undeprecated(which would likely require said hundreds of implications to it), or the creation of a new tag for the total lack of text in a post(no artist names, no "in universe" text such as signs or such, etc), likely something like no_text.
I don't think a no text tag will work. If it is used for posts with absolutely no text as you proposed, it would be very easy to misuse. Artist names are sometimes hard to spot in highly detailed images. Same with small signs that are part of the background.
If we relaxed the requirements and only considered main elements in the image such as dialogue and easily visible signs while ignoring artist names and hard-to-find text, then the tag would easily apply to the majority of posts on Danbooru. It's generally better to use the minority case for presence/absence pairs, which is why we use no humans instead of human (most posts have at least one human or humanoid character) and male focus instead of female focus (there is a bias in favor of female character artwork).
I think undepreciating text is the better option of the two, but I'm not sure it's necessary. We have tags such as artist name, signature, and the username tags, as well as tag combinations such as comic + -silent_comic that can find most text a user might want to see. If users want to search for text on signs, we could consider adding a tag specifically for readable signs.
Blank_User said:
I don't think a no text tag will work. If it is used for posts with absolutely no text as you proposed, it would be very easy to misuse. Artist names are sometimes hard to spot in highly detailed images. Same with small signs that are part of the background.
if we were to have a tag's validity/existence based on how little misuse they would get, then orange hair and red hair wouldn't exist.
If we relaxed the requirements and only considered main elements in the image such as dialogue and easily visible signs while ignoring artist names and hard-to-find text, then the tag would easily apply to the majority of posts on Danbooru. It's generally better to use the minority case for presence/absence pairs, which is why we use no humans instead of human (most posts have at least one human or humanoid character) and male focus instead of female focus (there is a bias in favor of female character artwork).
the fact that we don't tag "defaults" has lead to a lot of issues that more and more makes the issue, for example, topless being implied to be female toplessness, when that's not always the case when you can't tell the gender or is otherwise androgynous, or the fact that female_focus isn't a tag because it's assumed to be the default, when in order to search it you'd currently need to ~ the girl tags, and negate the [n]boy and [n]other tags
I think undepreciating text is the better option of the two, but I'm not sure it's necessary. We have tags such as artist name, signature, and the username tags, as well as tag combinations such as comic + -silent_comic that can find most text a user might want to see. If users want to search for text on signs, we could consider adding a tag specifically for readable signs.
I wouldn't be opposed to a tag for signs with writing, or maybe even "in universe text", i.e. not speech bubbles or such, however i believe this is missing the point, that, particularly for the majority of users on the site, that currently if you wanted to look in general for works without text on them, it would be basically impossible baring ~'ing a few tags such as silent_comic and textless version, and even then, those are only a fraction of the works that would apply to this. yes, something like no_text would apply to a lot of posts
ultimately i'm fine with either text or no_text existing, but one of them should exists
Pokeball99 said:
if we were to have a tag's validity/existence based on how little misuse they would get, then orange hair and red hair wouldn't exist.
the fact that we don't tag "defaults" has lead to a lot of issues that more and more makes the issue, for example, topless being implied to be female toplessness, when that's not always the case when you can't tell the gender or is otherwise androgynous, or the fact that female_focus isn't a tag because it's assumed to be the default, when in order to search it you'd currently need to ~ the girl tags, and negate the [n]boy and [n]other tags
Fyi, you need to use the post's actual url for your titled link to actually work. I would also argue it's not the best example because I think you can pretty comfortably tag that as a male.
As for female focus, 1girl alone accounts for 4.5 million posts out of Danbooru's 6.3 million. Multiple girls is another 1.2 million. That makes 5.7 million out of 6.3 million, or approximately 90% of all posts.
The reason these things (female focus and no text) don't have dedicated search options is because they make up so much of the total posts count that any search that doesn't explicitly exclude them will feature them as the majority to an overwhelming degree. You don't need a search for posts only featuring girls, because posts that don't feature guys at all count around 5 million, and even when guys are present half the time they're lucky to be more than a disembodied dick or hands, or a featureless torso. 90% of posts on this site are female focus, even when males are present. "Others" are even less relevant to this.
Pokeball99 said:
if we were to have a tag's validity/existence based on how little misuse they would get, then orange hair and red hair wouldn't exist.
Except debates over hair color are about a property of an object that all parties agree exist. A better argument would be to say that the no humans tag exists despite the possibility of mistagging due to not seeing a well-hidden human in the image. This is a valid weakness of the tag, but since there are only about 97,000 no humans posts, it isn't likely to cause too many problems. Also, to add on to what blindVigil said:
blindVigil said:
The reason these things (female focus and no text) don't have dedicated search options is because they make up so much of the total posts count that any search that doesn't explicitly exclude them will feature them as the majority to an overwhelming degree. You don't need a search for posts only featuring girls, because posts that don't feature guys at all count around 5 million, and even when guys are present half the time they're lucky to be more than a disembodied dick or hands, or a featureless torso. 90% of posts on this site are female focus, even when males are present. "Others" are even less relevant to this.
This is what I was talking about when I referred to minority cases. To find posts that would apply for female focus, you can search for -male focus and most of the results will be what you're looking for. A female focus tag would only be marginally more refined. Meanwhile, it would increase the burden on uploaders as they would have yet another tag they'd have to add to their posts to ensure the tag works as intended. It's too much cost for too little benefit. By tagging minority cases, we allow not just the ability to find these posts among the majority, but also the ability to filter them out if desired as well as reduce the number of tags that need to be added to an image.
If you want to filter posts with text you'd need many tags for sure, but I don't think that's a valid reason to create an ambiguous tag that would cover a large part of the posts here, would definitely be used for any kind of text regardless of its wiki and gardening, requests for implying related tags would eventually be made and it'd be used here and there in the place of specific tags.
So I'm not in favor of the proposal, regardless, only text would need to exist given the higher amount of posts without text - I guess. Alternatively, I think you can blacklist text related tags.
