Topic: Doors – BUR

The tag alias #81145 door_open -> open_door has been approved.

Reason: They are the same thing. Just unifying between one tag and other.

EDIT: The tag alias door_open -> open_door (forum #474870) has been approved by @furrypickle.

The bulk update request #12813 has been rejected.

create alias in_doorway (212) -> doorway (5134)
create implication doormat (181) -> door (19480)
create implication batwing_door (6) -> door (19480)
create implication double_door (34) -> door (19480)
create implication dutch_door (4) -> door (19480)
create implication french_door (0) -> door (19480)
create implication glass_door (317) -> door (19480)
create implication sliding_door (182) -> door (19480)
create implication closing_door (105) -> door (19480)
create implication door_slam (248) -> door (19480)
create implication opening_door (643) -> door (19480)
create implication doorway (5134) -> door (19480)
create implication open_door (1572) -> door (19480)
create implication closed_door (125) -> door (19480)
create implication broken_door (76) -> door (19480)
create implication car_door (33) -> door (19480)
create implication garage_door (89) -> door (19480)
create implication knocking_on_door (249) -> door (19480)
create implication door_handle (1392) -> door (19480)

Reason: A set of doors

EDIT: The bulk update request #12813 (forum #475175) has been rejected by @furrypickle.

isuh said:
The bulk update request #12813 has been rejected.

create alias in_doorway (212) -> doorway (5134)
create implication doormat (181) -> door (19480)
create implication batwing_door (6) -> door (19480)
create implication double_door (34) -> door (19480)
create implication dutch_door (4) -> door (19480)
create implication french_door (0) -> door (19480)
create implication glass_door (317) -> door (19480)
create implication sliding_door (182) -> door (19480)
create implication closing_door (105) -> door (19480)
create implication door_slam (248) -> door (19480)
create implication opening_door (643) -> door (19480)
create implication doorway (5134) -> door (19480)
create implication open_door (1572) -> door (19480)
create implication closed_door (125) -> door (19480)
create implication broken_door (76) -> door (19480)
create implication car_door (33) -> door (19480)
create implication garage_door (89) -> door (19480)
create implication knocking_on_door (249) -> door (19480)
create implication door_handle (1392) -> door (19480)

Reason: A set of doors

Some of these are good ideas, but I have doubts about a few of them.

create implication doorbell (182) -> door (17913) -- you can have a doorbell or see a doorbell without seeing the door that is assumed to be somewhere nearby. Doorbells are distinctive enough that doors are not always bothered to be shown. I don't think these should be implicated tags.

-

create implication in_doorway (212) -> door (17913)
create implication doorway (4504) -> door (17913)
create implication doorframe (620) -> door (17913)

You can see the frame/opening without seeing the attached door. Some doorframes might not even bother to draw a door, or the door part could be removed/broken. Sometimes it's the angle just not showing it. But being designed to have a door is not the same as there being a door that is visible enough to be tagged. A lot of examples will have both, but not all.

-

Separately, I wonder if there's a useful difference between doorway and doorframe and if we need both? If we only keep one, then doorway is probably more versatile because not every doorway has a framed in style around it.

furrypickle said:
You can see the frame/opening without seeing the attached door. Some doorframes might not even bother to draw a door, or the door part could be removed/broken. Sometimes it's the angle just not showing it. But being designed to have a door is not the same as there being a door that is visible enough to be tagged. A lot of examples will have both, but not all.

Separately, I wonder if there's a useful difference between doorway and doorframe and if we need both? If we only keep one, then doorway is probably more versatile because not every doorway has a framed in style around it.

Sorry for the delay.

Well, after all search I did, I have a conclusion. Firstly, it more appropriate if we start aliasing doorframe with door, because doorframe already featured a physical structure of a door and have other component's that allow a settings of a door.

In the other hand, doorway doesn't resolve this problem alone, though some pictures of this tag include sides of door such a side jambs, head jamps, hinges and a door itself, but in general, we don't have a specific tag about no door cases here on this site, because it doesn't exist here. While I was searching about doors I found a source that we should apply here; in case if there's no door we name it as cased_opening. As a example below:
post #6054792

In this way, It's very easy to search a lot of categories in relation of door.

furrypickle said:
create implication doorbell (182) -> door (17913) -- you can have a doorbell or see a doorbell without seeing the door that is assumed to be somewhere nearby. Doorbells are distinctive enough that doors are not always bothered to be shown. I don't think these should be implicated tags.

I forgot that there's some tags that I should aliases them, such a in_doorway and doorway. I guess there's more to imply and aliasing them but I have to update forum #475175 yet and fixing. Thanks. :)

The tag alias door_open -> open_door (forum #474870) has been approved by @furrypickle.

The bulk update request #12813 (forum #475175) has been rejected by @furrypickle.

Despite some of the adjustments, I still can't approve that. But I will pull out the ones I think we could do.

--

Some more notes on some of the ones rejected:

-
doubts:

implicate car_door -> door
-- while technically a type of door by function, is this really what people are expecting to see when they search door? A vehicle with door lines or someone getting out of one? OR will that feel like a mistag because it's not what they're thinking about at all?

implicate garage_door -> door
-- while this has 'door' in the name, it is not the shape, form or location people are expecting under door. Even when it is open and in use, I don't think it's what door searches are looking for. Even less when it's just symbolic lines over a garage extension. So I don't think it will be helpful to be implicated to door and too many images with garage_door visible will feel like mistags in a door search.

-
can't:

implicate doormat -> door
-- a doormat can be recognizable without a visible door or even being used in front of a doorway.

implicate doorway -> door
-- you can have a doorway without a door (either the door removed, implied, not in view, etc). Surprisingly common actually.

implicate door_slam -> door
-- sometimes refers to just the sound effect and context, with the door out of sight. Sometimes just the visual without any sound effects. Not sure this one cleanly implicates anywhere.

The bulk update request #12959 is active.

create alias doorframe (9) -> doorway (5134)
create alias door_frame (0) -> doorway (5134)
create implication in_doorway (212) -> doorway (5134)
create implication batwing_door (6) -> door (19480)
create implication double_door (34) -> door (19480)
create implication dutch_door (4) -> door (19480)
create implication french_door (0) -> door (19480)
create implication glass_door (317) -> door (19480)
create implication sliding_door (182) -> door (19480)
create implication closing_door (105) -> door (19480)
create implication opening_door (643) -> door (19480)
create implication open_door (1572) -> door (19480)
create implication closed_door (125) -> door (19480)
create implication broken_door (76) -> door (19480)
create implication knocking_on_door (249) -> door (19480)
create implication door_handle (1392) -> door (19480)

Reason: I think these ones of that list can work.

EDIT: The bulk update request #12959 (forum #476881) has been approved by @furrypickle.

The bulk update request #12975 is active.

remove alias door_frame (0) -> doorframe (9)

Reason: first step

EDIT: The bulk update request #12975 (forum #477008) has been approved by @furrypickle.

The bulk update request #12975 (forum #477008) has been approved by @furrypickle.

The bulk update request #12959 (forum #476881) has been approved by @furrypickle.