|
|
Welcome to the Database Correction page. This page is for letting me or the other editors know of corrections that need to be made. Please read the posting instructions carefully.
|
|
| Wednesday August 30 00:35:56 2017 Re: Updated tags |
| Gagster wrote: > Yes. Format all around should be Tags: (including colon) > item1, item2.... Okey dokey. Should have something by the weekend. |
| Brian R |
| Wednesday August 30 00:54:14 2017 Re: Updated tags |
| Gagster wrote: > bonddesc_handsspread incl. hands to chair arms and upper-only spreadeagles > bonddesc_handsspreadAOH I'm wondering about these two, since they seem confusingly similar based on the explanatory text. I think the latter is new? I agree that it's a useful distinction, but I think it would make more sense to move upper-only spreadeagles into bonddesc_handsspreadAOH if we're going to keep both. As I mentioned in passing, "hands over head" (as opposed to "hands together over head") is one of the few tags in my DB that occurs a fair amount that I haven't figured out how to map yet, since the damsel's hands aren't necessarily held together in these cases but aren't necessarily held apart either: they might have a fair amount of lateral room to move, just not vertical room, if that makes sense. I don't just want to drop these tags on the floor, but I might need to revisit them individually and see which new tag makes the most sense in each case. That list of "hands over head" scenes BTW if anyone wants to take a peek: 454 486 584 780 876 1078 1204 1462 1676 2166 2405 3883 4369 5293 5636 6347 7835 9210 10485 10533 12425 Couple other potential tags I was wondering about, since they turn up almost 1400 times total in my DB: would onscreen_tying and onscreen_gagging be useful to have? |
| Raffish |
| Wednesday August 30 09:13:45 2017 Re: Updated tags |
| Raffish wrote: > Gagster wrote: > > bonddesc_handsspread incl. hands to chair arms and > upper-only spreadeagles > > bonddesc_handsspreadAOH > I'm wondering about these two, since they seem > confusingly similar based on the explanatory text. I > think the latter is new? I agree that it's a useful > distinction, but I think it would make more sense to move > upper-only spreadeagles into bonddesc_handsspreadAOH if > we're going to keep both. > As I mentioned in passing, "hands over head" > (as opposed to "hands together over head") is > one of the few tags in my DB that occurs a fair amount > that I haven't figured out how to map yet, since the > damsel's hands aren't necessarily held together in these > cases but aren't necessarily held apart either: they > might have a fair amount of lateral room to move, just > not vertical room, if that makes sense. I don't just want > to drop these tags on the floor, but I might need to > revisit them individually and see which new tag makes the > most sense in each case. That list of "hands over > head" scenes BTW if anyone wants to take a peek: I'm not sure about the best way to classify how the hands are tied. At the moment, the full set of "hands" tags is as follows: bonddesc_handsbehind bonddesc_handsinfront bonddesc_handsatsides bonddesc_handsspread incl. hands to chair arms and upper-only spreadeagles bonddesc_handstogetherAOH bonddesc_handsspreadAOH The first three make sense, but there's a lot of leeway in the others. We can collapse the two AOH's into a single tag, bonddesc_AOH, and have a separate tag for bonddesc_handstogether and bonddesc_handspread, but there's so many ways to tie hands that something is always going to be left out or ambiguous. I like the online_tying and online_gagging idea, and its actually something that occurred to me while I was running the carrying tag clips. I have free time today, so I'll try to take a look at the AOH clips and see if there's anything that pops up that might help distinguish them. |
| Gagster |
| Wednesday August 30 11:00:01 2017 Re: Updated tags |
| Gagster wrote: > We can collapse the two AOH's into a > single tag, bonddesc_AOH, and have a separate tag for > bonddesc_handstogether and bonddesc_handspread I like this. If we do that, I don't think there's any need to further analyze my "hands over head" entries. The mappings I'd use would be "hands at sides" => "bonddesc_handsatsides", "hands behind" => "bonddesc_handsbehind", "hands in front" => "bonddesc_handsinfront", "hands spread at sides" => "bonddesc_handsspread", "hands to chair arms" => "bonddesc_handsspread", "hands together over head" => "bonddesc_handstogether" and "bonddesc_AOH" "hands over head" => "bonddesc_AOH", "upper spreadeagle" => "bonddesc_handsspread" and "bonddesc_AOH" The only thing that seems a bit awkward about this is that the "hands together over head" case is probably the only time "bondage_handstogether" gets used (since it would seem redundant in the "hands behind" and "hands in front" cases). I can't immediately think of a more elegant solution, though. For now, I've added these, along with "onscreen_tying" and "onscreen_gagging". New list (as always with a current snapshot of Brian's DB) at the link. |
| Raffish |
| https://drive.google.com/open?id=1SISJcbWo27iPSaMYXoB2SjLvKugXhhgbAM5cmVUYrYA |
| Wednesday August 30 11:36:21 2017 Re: Updated tags |
| Is there anything that could be done to force a strict alphabetical order? Seeing "F/F" after "gagtype_" is jarring. |
| Sam |
| Wednesday August 30 12:07:06 2017 Re: Updated tags |
| Sam wrote: > Is there anything that could be done to force a strict > alphabetical order? Seeing "F/F" after > "gagtype_" is jarring. Are you seeing this in the current DB, or in my combined list? It should never happen in the latter unless I've got a bug. I did just notice one bug (now fixed at the link) in which uppercase letters were sorted before lowercase, so for instance F/F would appear before bonddesc_, but it should never have shown up after gagtype_. I'd imagine that there isn't any way to guarantee strict alphabetical order *going forward* without the Engineer enforcing it at either entry submission or display time. |
| Raffish |
| Wednesday August 30 12:31:55 2017 Re: Updated tags |
| Current dB, and I'm seeing plenty of it. I always try to manually fix such entries on sight, but it'd be great if it could be automated. |
| Sam |
| Wednesday August 30 19:42:45 2017 Re: Updated tags |
| Sam wrote: > Current dB, and I'm seeing plenty of it. I always try to > manually fix such entries on sight, but it'd be great if > it could be automated. As people are just putting them in the Description, there's no real way to enforce anything. It would require adding a field in the entry form, as was done with Episode. When the update feature is completed, there might be a way to use it to reorder tags. It doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me. |
| Brian R |
| Wednesday August 30 22:08:25 2017 Re: Updated tags |
| I have completed the first part of the utility. Right now it extracts (or is supposed to) the tags from each DB entry. These are stored in the file linked below. This is accessible to DB Editors only. |
| Brian R |
| http://brianspage.com/dbedit/dbtags.html |
| Wednesday August 30 22:58:36 2017 Re: Updated tags |
| Cool. If it helps, I basically had to write a lot of this in the process of converting my tags. My script will take whatever's in the DB, flag any tags that aren't in the official list for manual correction, and sort the rest alphabetically. So if you have a way to load in the same format file you just extracted, one of us could just run that once in a while, just making sure not to overwrite any tags that were added manually while the update was happening. |
| Raffish |
|
|