Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
The bulk update request #10371 is pending approval.
create alias toothy_grin (4553) -> grin (103415) # has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through bur
create implication grin (103415) -> teeth (910169)
Reason: The wiki defines a grin as a smile wide enough to see teeth. Toothy grin, then, is a redundant tag. Also, by that definition, teeth should be visible.
is bayleen is teeth, though? or any other non-teeth structure a character might have in their mouth, for that matter. or, like, a lack thereof.
dba_afish said:
is bayleen is teeth, though? or any other non-teeth structure a character might have in their mouth, for that matter. or, like, a lack thereof.
Are grins defined by if that person had teeth then they would be visible? I think the wiki page has some clarity issues.
I don't think a grin necessitates teeth:
post #792685
It'd be a type of smile where you would see teeth if they were drawn and the character has them, but a toothless grin is possible. Could just see gums or an empty space in the mouth.
In that case should toothy grin still be its own tag?
The bulk update request #10417 is pending approval.
create implication toothy_grin (4553) -> grin (103415)
create implication toothy_grin (4553) -> teeth (910169)
Reason: If we define toothy grin as a grin where you can see teeth, then these implications make sense.
