Topic: Tag implication: space_helmet -> helmet

The tag implication #70700 space_helmet -> helmet is pending approval.

Reason: It's a type of helmet that is worn by astronauts while in outer space.

What exactly is unique about space_helmet that isnt say covered by bubble_helmet + space for example?

ryu_deacon said:
What exactly is unique about space_helmet that isnt say covered by bubble_helmet + space for example?

the fact that the helmets of actual space suits worn when doing EVAs don't look anything like bubble helmets, maybe?

The bulk update request #12818 is pending approval.

create implication bubble_helmet (314) -> helmet (36953)
create implication broken_helmet (50) -> helmet (36953)
create implication wearing_helmet (441) -> helmet (36953)
create alias fish_bowl_helmet (27) -> bubble_helmet (314)
create alias fishbowl_helmet (2) -> bubble_helmet (314)

Reason: Inspired by topic #61023 and it’s replies, since these helmet related tags aren’t implied yet.

Edit: As one of the reply pointed out, fish bowl helmet should be alias to the border bubble helmet due to it’s similarity.

Weird, helmet implicates armor. But not all helmets are armor.

whatismyname1234 said:
The bulk update request #12818 is pending approval.

create implication bubble_helmet (314) -> helmet (36953)
create implication broken_helmet (50) -> helmet (36953)
create implication wearing_helmet (441) -> helmet (36953)
create alias fish_bowl_helmet (27) -> bubble_helmet (314)
create alias fishbowl_helmet (2) -> bubble_helmet (314)

Reason: Inspired by topic #61023 and it’s replies, since these helmet related tags aren’t implied yet.

we should probably alias fish_bowl_helmet and fishbowl_helmet to bubble_helmet while we're at it.

dba_afish said:
the fact that the helmets of actual space suits worn when doing EVAs don't look anything like bubble helmets, maybe?

from the submissions that have been tagged as space_helmet the cases where bubble_helmet dont apply is literally less then ten and in those, ether they are not actually featuring a helmet or the helmet is better described as a visor. Space helmet should not be used for the same reason we dont attach indevidual species to bodypart tags. Speaking of visors, also topic #58065 (old pending visor_helmet alias).

If you want to be overly specific, tags such as NASA helmet would be more proper..

ryu_deacon said:
from the submissions that have been tagged as space_helmet the cases where bubble_helmet dont apply is literally less then ten and in those, ether they are not actually featuring a helmet or the helmet is better described as a visor. Space helmet should not be used for the same reason we dont attach indevidual species to bodypart tags. Speaking of visors, also topic #58065 (old pending visor_helmet alias).

If you want to be overly specific, tags such as NASA helmet would be more proper..

I don't-- what? should we just get rid of bicycle_helmet too, then? replace it with what, chinstrap_helmet? and also include modern combat_helmets and medieval kettle_helmets and those helmets that helicopter pilots wear and everything else with a chinstrap as just the same tag?

sometimes we just have things that are named after their main function.

dba_afish said:
I don't-- what? should we just get rid of bicycle_helmet too, then? replace it with what, chinstrap_helmet? and also include modern combat_helmets and medieval kettle_helmets and those helmets that helicopter pilots wear and everything else with a chinstrap as just the same tag?

sometimes we just have things that are named after their main function.

"space" is not a function but a place, and the style of helmet often found in space settings is not exclusive to space it is also found commonly in submerged settings(underwater) and in containment settings like in a lab. And yes bicycle helmets as well given both that the appearance can vary anywhere from a generic shell cover basically following the characters hair line like a duplicated layer to perforated turtle shell shaped styrofoam filled composite structures that are held to head by a chinstrap and that it is commonly worn on multiple vehicles or in situations like bungee jumping rather then something exclusively for bicyles. Should we make a helmet for every single vehicle/method of movement or place out there, mountain helmet, skate board helmet unicyle helmet, water helmet, and so on? chinstrap_helmet describes an actual visible feature of the helmet and would be much more helpful in searches then any of those.

In regard to the kettle helmets the name does reference a specific objective style or feature on a helmet rather then just an ambiguous place or role that could have something that looks like anything really.

ryu_deacon said:
"space" is not a function but a place

No, its shorthand for 'spacesuit'. It's a spacesuit helmet.

A spacesuit is an environmental suit which does have special function: protection against outer space. space refers to its intended functionality in outer space.

A spacesuit helmet is one piece of a spacesuit.

space_helmet is acceptable shorthand for spacesuit_helmet.

waydence said:
Weird, helmet implicates armor. But not all helmets are armor.

dba_afish said:
we should probably alias fish_bowl_helmet and fishbowl_helmet to bubble_helmet while we're at it.

I updated the BUR now.

kyiiel said:
No, its shorthand for 'spacesuit'. It's a spacesuit helmet.

A spacesuit is an environmental suit which does have special function: protection against outer space. space refers to its intended functionality in outer space.

A spacesuit helmet is one piece of a spacesuit.

space_helmet is acceptable shorthand for spacesuit_helmet.

please read the tag definition for space. Protection and space are not synonymous. And like dba_afish you did not address the fact that we dont tag solely based on role, we tag by visible appearance and as previously noted space_helmet has no defined consistent form, it can be anything.

'Space_helmet is a space helmet because you wear it in space' is not a legitimate argument for a tag, if you cannot describe any visible features to it that are consistant then it doesn't belong.

Just a reminder that we do not have tags for helmets in other places/environments, so why should space_helmet be an exception?

post #4934622
if I were to say that this character is in space and is wearing this helmet to protect themselves do you think it would really be legitimate to tag this as space_helmet? That is your argument.

ryu_deacon said:
post #4934622
if I were to say that this character is in space and is wearing this helmet to protect themselves do you think it would really be legitimate to tag this as space_helmet? That is your argument.

what?

Removing the armor implication should be done in its own topic with a discussion around that specifically rather than being buried in a completely unrelated BUR just because one person offhandedly mentioned it

You also shouldn't create new implications while removing an implication from the target tag in the same BUR, instructions are not ran in order, they're ran in what is likely semi-random order as well as multiple instructions being able to run concurrently

That's going to result in inconsistent posts, some will get updated while the implication still exists while others will be after it's removed

Also the definition on the armor wiki:

Armor is any type of protective covering that prevents damage or, at the very least, mitigate it. Be it from impact to hazardous conditions.

I'd think any helmet should fit that regardless of practical or actual use
topic #12149 is where the implication comes from, and as it says, "If it isn't armor, shouldn't it be called a hat?"

donovan_dmc said:
Also the definition on the armor wiki:
I'd think any helmet should fit that regardless of practical or actual use
topic #12149 is where the implication comes from, and as it says, "If it isn't armor, shouldn't it be called a hat?"

PPE should probably should be a separate thing from armour. one is protection from passive environmental hazards, one is protection from active threats.

I wonder if we should just split helmet into two tags, honestly... although I'm not sure what the disambig would be for the non-armour helmet tag, something like helmet_(protective_equipment) probably wouldn't get the idea across. also, I'm not exactly sure where something like a football_helmet falls, the threats they protect against are kinda aggressors, but their goal isn't actually to cause injury, that's more of a side effect of a high-impact contact sport.

dba_afish said:
what?

This is an hypothetical example of your and Kyiiel's argument, this is what you are calling for.

Are you being willfully obtuse to your very own argument?

ryu_deacon said:
This is an hypothetical example of your and Kyiiel's argument, this is what you are calling for.

Are you being willfully obtuse to your very own argument?

your argument doesn't make sense. I mean I could point out just as it is that the image you're using as an example is a character wearing what we tag as a bicycle_helmet despite, y'know, being on roller skates.

a space_helmet isn't just a character wearing any helmet in space, it's a helmet that is meant to stop the the wearer dying from exposure to an environment with zero atmosphere, just like a bicycle_helmet isn't just a helmet worn when a character is on a bicycle, rather it's a helmet designed to protect the wearer from the hazards associated with cycling and other similar activities. just because often times the design of a space hemet is abstracted to essentially an overturned fish bowl dosn't make the concept of a space hemet, like, not exist.

dba_afish said:
your argument doesn't make sense. I mean I could point out just as it is that the image you're using as an example is a character wearing what we tag as a bicycle_helmet despite, y'know, being on roller skates.

a space_helmet isn't just a character wearing any helmet in space, it's a helmet that is meant to stop the the wearer dying from exposure to an environment with zero atmosphere, just like a bicycle_helmet isn't just a helmet worn when a character is on a bicycle, rather it's a helmet designed to protect the wearer from the hazards associated with cycling and other similar activities. just because often times the design of a space hemet is abstracted to essentially an overturned fish bowl dosn't make the concept of a space hemet, like, not exist.

it was your argument not mine, I have been asking you to define space_helmet by visible characteristics.

Instead you are again just using role alone which is not a legitimate reason for the tag, you still have not provided how one can identify a space helmet beyond what the helmet can be used for or place. You are not understanding that your argument is circular and not grounded in anything objectively visible as part of the helmet which is against twys. And Ive stated before that bicycle helmet had the same problem but you did not actually read my responses it seems. And no this is not just down to abstractions but completely different designs that can serve the role.

A tag that can be anything is not useful and space_helmet is one of those kinds of tags.

donovan_dmc said:
Removing the armor implication should be done in its own topic […]
You also shouldn't create new implications while removing an implication from the target tag in the same BUR […]

Also the definition on the armor wiki:
I'd think any helmet should fit that regardless of practical or actual use
topic #12149 is where the implication comes from, and as it says, "If it isn't armor, shouldn't it be called a hat?"

I see, i’ll remove the changes

ryu_deacon said:

I have been asking you to define space_helmet by visible characteristics.

A helmet designed for use in outer space. The visible characteristic is that its functionality is clearly designed for use in outer space, and is designed to be used with the rest of a space suit.

It need not even be designed for EVA. They can also be designed for IVA taking place in space as well. See spacex's space suit.

kyiiel said:
A helmet designed for use in outer space. The visible characteristic is that its functionality is clearly designed for use in outer space, and is designed to be used with the rest of a space suit.

It need not even be designed for EVA. They can also be designed for IVA taking place in space as well. See spacex's space suit.

Assumed functionality/role is not a visible characteristic. If you cannot describe any visible features to it that are consistent then it doesn't belong.

Some examples of what a visible feature or characteristic is are things like shape, color, texture, lighting effects, coverage amount, structure...

Is there a lack of understanding of English in this thread or are you playing stupid. I have said that roles on their own is not a proper reason for the tag to exist and asked you to describe visible consistent features, you still have not done that instead repeating the wrong circular argument.

Describe to me what it consistently looks like, can you do that?? This should be a simple to answer question.

ryu_deacon said:
Assumed functionality/role is not a visible characteristic.

yes it is.

ryu_deacon said:
If you cannot describe any visible features to it that are consistent then it doesn't belong.

yes it does.

ryu_deacon said:
Some examples of what a visible feature or characteristic is are things like shape, color, texture, lighting effects, coverage amount, structure...

can you discribe to me what colour, texture, or "lighting effects" a that a pair of pants has? what?

how the hell do any of these come into this? there's not a single thing where the base tag for something requires a certain colour, texture, or whatever "lighting effect" is supposed to mean (matte or reflective, I would have to guess... glowing?).

ryu_deacon said:
[...]roles on their own is not a proper reason for the tag to exist[...]

yes they are.

ryu_deacon said:
Describe to me what it consistently looks like, can you do that?? This should be a simple to answer question.

they look like this.

dba_afish said:
[...]
can you describe to me what colour, texture, or "lighting effects" a that a pair of pants has? what?

how the hell do any of these come into this? there's not a single thing where the base tag for something requires a certain colour, texture, or whatever "lighting effect" is supposed to mean (matte or reflective, I would have to guess... glowing?).

it is a piece of cloth that is flush to the lower body and has open sleeves that cover the legs. And then we have additional tags such as the red_pants sub tag to specifically define the pants as being visibly the color red. Worth noting we do not have a tag called 'space_pants'. Space_helmet is not a base tag, it is a subtag of helmet yet does not define a visible feature unlike say skull helmet, hard hat, or red helmet who do not rely on just a role.

they look like this.

Given none of these seem consistent can you describe these? Answer the question.

And again role/purpose is not a visible feature or characteristic, you doing 'NO U' bs in response to my messages does not change that.

Additionally back to the pants example you brought up, all subtag implications do not rely on just a role/purpose to describe them.

ryu_deacon said:
please read the tag definition for space. Protection and space are not synonymous. And like dba_afish you did not address the fact that we dont tag solely based on role, we tag by visible appearance and as previously noted space_helmet has no defined consistent form, it can be anything.

TWYS is tag what you see, not tag only geometry while ignoring function.
Function and intended design are routinely used to disambiguate visually similar or even identical objects when shape alone is insufficient.

For example, a bat_(object) may or may not be tagged as melee_weapon depending on how it is depicted or intended to be used:

Melee weapon:
post #2585068

Not a melee weapon:
post #5914952

These objects can be visually similar, yet are tagged differently based on depicted function. This is established tagging practice, not an exception.

We can go further: the weapon tag itself cannot be defined by visible characteristics at all. Its definition explicitly depends on design or use:

Weapon: a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage.

There is no single visual form shared by all weapons. Function is required for the tag to exist at all.

----

'Space_helmet is a space helmet because you wear it in space' is not a legitimate argument for a tag, if you cannot describe any visible features to it that are consistant then it doesn't belong.

A space helmet is not any helmet worn in space just as a diving helmet is not any helmet worn underwater. These tags refer to helmets designed for those environments, and that design intent is generally visually inferable through features like sealing, structure, and integration with specialized suits or equipment.

----

Just a reminder that we do not have tags for helmets in other places/environments, so why should space_helmet be an exception?

This is a false premise. We do have helmet tags defined by environment and function, such as diving_helmet and mining_helmet.

----

post #4934622
if I were to say that this character is in space and is wearing this helmet to protect themselves do you think it would really be legitimate to tag this as space_helmet? That is your argument.

Please do not fabricate my argument.

That helmet is not designed to protect the wearer from the hazards of outer space. That is a bicycle helmet. Even if the character were depicted in space, it would still be tagged bicycle_helmet, because tags are based on what the object is, not the environment it happens to be placed in.

A space_helmet refers to a helmet designed to interface with a spacesuit and support survival in a vacuum or near-vacuum environment, not merely a helmet worn while a scene is set in space.

----

ryu_deacon said:
[pants are] a piece of cloth that is flush to the lower body and has open sleeves that cover the legs.

This definition is incorrect.

They do not have to be flush to the body, because pants are not always worn. Unworn pants are not flush to a body, yet are still pants.

Pants are also not defined by being made of cloth. They can be leather, rubber, plastic, or other materials.

What defines pants is that they are an outer garment designed to cover the body from the waist down to the lower legs/ankles, and have separate leg enclosures. The definition of pants actually does rely on the intended design of the garment, not how it's actually depicted in the image.