A question about tags
Mar. 6th, 2009 02:01 amIn re: tagging our posts - due to the length of character names, if we're doing this whole identities thing, should we be using something like "char: cape name/civilian name" instead? (For example, instead of "character: silver swan ii/nessie kapatel" we could get "char: silver swan ii/nessie kapatelis," just to pick a completely random, have-no-idea-why-that-might-have-occurre d-to-me example >.>). If so, that's probably something we should hash out early while it's still not too much of a headache to change.
For relevant legality,

For relevant legality,


no subject
Date: 2009-03-06 01:21 am (UTC)Grrrrrrrrrrrrr stupid tag limits.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-06 01:27 am (UTC)Legacies and changing identities make the whole cape name/civilian name set up rather overly complex.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2009-03-06 03:15 am (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2009-03-06 06:36 pm (UTC)The compound tags do have their uses, for instance we may want 'title: robin' when we need the book rather than the cape, but these should be the exception rather than the rule.
Simple is best. The less complicated the tags are the fewer mistakes are going to be made. After all what are the chances of accidentally creating a new tag by misspelling 'jason todd' compared to 'character: robin ii/red hood/jason todd'?
I think what we really need are obvious tags like 'robin', 'nightwing', 'dick grayson', 'tim drake', and an external system that monitors our tagging and gives us a way to cross-reference them. That way we could look up 'tim drake' + 'dick grayson' when we need the brotherly lovin'! ^_^
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: