Topic: Comprehensive Unbuttoned BUR part 1

The bulk update request #13034 is pending approval.

create alias unbuttoned_swimsuit (1) -> unbuttoned_swimwear (1)
create implication unbuttoned_topwear (62) -> unbuttoned (1741)
create implication unbuttoned_bottomwear (117) -> unbuttoned (1741)
create implication unbuttoned_underwear (21) -> unbuttoned (1741)
create implication unbuttoned_dress (13) -> unbuttoned (1741)
create implication unbuttoned_pajamas (3) -> unbuttoned (1741)
create implication unbuttoned_swimwear (1) -> unbuttoned (1741)

Reason: All of the unbuttoned clothing tags should implicate 'unbuttoned'. 'unbuttoned_swimsuit' should be aliased to 'unbuttoned_swimwear' since 'swimsuit' is aliased to 'swimwear'.

here9999 said:
create implication unbuttoned_shirt (1676) -> unbuttoned (1707)
create implication unbuttoned_pants (812) -> unbuttoned (1707)
create implication unbuttoned_shorts (178) -> unbuttoned (1707)
create implication unbuttoned_jeans (16) -> unbuttoned (1707)
create implication unbuttoned_bra (7) -> unbuttoned (1707)
create implication unbuttoned_vest (6) -> unbuttoned (1707)
create implication unbuttoned_skirt (6) -> unbuttoned (1707)
create implication unbuttoned_pajama_shirt (3) -> unbuttoned (1707)
create implication unbuttoned_coat (2) -> unbuttoned (1707)

These are unnecessary/redundant if they will also imply unbuttoned_topwear or unbuttoned_bottomwear, which will imply unbuttoned.

watsit said:
These are unnecessary/redundant if they will also imply unbuttoned_topwear or unbuttoned_bottomwear, which will imply unbuttoned.

True, but is there an issue with having redundant implications?

here9999 said:
True, but is there an issue with having redundant implications?

The processing time of an implication is not zero, so yes, there is an issue with redundant implications

donovan_dmc said:
The processing time of an implication is not zero, so yes, there is an issue with redundant implications

OK then, I'll remove those implications from the list.