Invisible Floor

BUR #58468 is pending approval.

mass update invisible_floor simple_background -from_below -> -invisible_floor

Almost a year since this tag was last brought up in topic #31871 and looking through the invisible floor tag, I really don't see the point of it on simple backgrounds.
Invisible wall or invisible chair say something about what's going on in the post, but invisible floor is just the default on simple backgrounds, and all those posts make it impossible to find what I think are the valid uses of the tag like post #4930744 or post #9965876.
Still needs a bit more cleanup and a wiki update but this BUR should deal with most of it if people agree to take the tag that route.

as the invisible floor wiki says it's for posts that have a character drawn standing without drawing the background. it was never intended for posts with an actually invisible floor and a background.

for post #9965876 i guess i'd use against fourth wall since it's the closest thing we have

i don't know what to do with the other post

trapster77 said in forum #436008:

as the invisible floor wiki says it's for posts that have a character drawn standing without drawing the background. it was never intended for posts with an actually invisible floor and a background.

for post #9965876 i guess i'd use against fourth wall since it's the closest thing we have

i don't know what to do with the other post

And I'm saying the tag as the wiki currently describes it is useless because a post with a character drawn standing without drawing the background is tagged simple background and from that you know that it has an invisible floor.

LightSolas said in forum #436009:

And I'm saying the tag as the wiki currently describes it is useless because a post with a character drawn standing without drawing the background is tagged simple background and from that you know that it has an invisible floor.

but not all inviisble floor posts are simple background posts. invisible_floor -simple_background

"no background" doesn't mean just simple background it means without drawing the floor (or the ground if outdoors)

maybe you want see-through floor or something like that

There's lots of examples of posts like the above 3 being tagged simple background, especially the last two. To me the wiki page for invisible floor is exactly describing the intent of simple background.

PersonalFowl said in forum #436014:

There's lots of examples of posts like the above 3 being tagged simple background, especially the last two. To me the wiki page for invisible floor is exactly describing the intent of simple background.

then they are mistagged. simple background is for posts that have a solid color background that you could easily... wait, @evazion changed the definition of simple background in january. wtf

like 6 months ago it was supposed to be only for solid color backgrounds. then @shimarei added a clause saying grids count and evazion extended it to include gradients too

does that mean any background that isn't a literal place like indoors / outdoors counts as a simple background now? if that's really the case then invisible floor is a pointless tag, but on the other hand it also means we no longer have a tag for simple backgrounds that are just a single color

i found invisible floor useful to replace on floor and on ground on some posts, since those are only for characters sitting in clear indoors and outdoors settings. i see how it isnt useful for standing characters, but i don't see what i'd replace it with for sitting. i guess sitting + simple background can do the trick, but it also mixes in invisible chair and characters that are clearly sitting on something like post #11249146

trapster77 said in forum #436019:

then they are mistagged. simple background is for posts that have a solid color background that you could easily... wait, @evazion changed the definition of simple background in january. wtf

like 6 months ago it was supposed to be only for solid color backgrounds. then @shimarei added a clause saying grids count and evazion extended it to include gradients too

does that mean any background that isn't a literal place like indoors / outdoors counts as a simple background now? if that's really the case then invisible floor is a pointless tag, but on the other hand it also means we no longer have a tag for simple backgrounds that are just a single color

ngl this is a really hard one, especially with the "damage already done" with countless of users tagging simple background on backgrounds that seem simple. I really like the idea of "an empty void" but that itself can be considered "an identifiable setting."

My reasoning for adding that clause was that I noticed that gradient background, grid background, etc. appeared to be a subset of simple background. Depending on the complexity of the gradient, grid, or stripes, it seemed users perceived it as "simple".

But... now that I re-read the wiki page, I noticed the first line states "a background that is solid"...

If we're truly going to stick with the "solid" approach for this tag, we can revert my clause, and in that case, time to fix a lot of posts that have simple background + `X_background`.

I believe the expansion of simple background was due to some requests for a 'detailed background' tag that the expanded definition could be excluded from a search to find.

As for invisible floor, I would agree that the clause "This is to draw the character without drawing a background" literally describes simple background and is causing some confusion. invisible floor should be able to exist independent from if the background is drawn or not.

invisible floor implies that characters are interacting with what would be a floor, but is, of course, not visible. It seems to be a tag similar to *_on_glass from_below, but without the visual indicator of glass (the streaks).

I think a lot of the confusion stems from characters no longer interacting with a visible, physical environment (i.e. standing on nothing, sitting on nothing, existing in a nothing space). The *_on glass tags somewhat helps, but when there is truly nothing there is something I think I have yet to understand.

I think invisible floor should be able to exist with simple background, as they are two independent ideas (albeit the wiki for invisible floor couples the two together, that should be changed).

Another problem with this tag, too, is that when it's used with simple background, well, the floor isn't invisible. The floor is right there in solid color; the shadow casted by the character also implies that the floor is solid and is VISIBLE. An infinity cove describes the space of the invisible_floor simple_background, especially when the floor is present. post #4930744 and post #9965876 as mentioned by OP truly describes the invisible floor.

I think a rewrite of that wiki needs to be done before this BUR goes. And even then, I still think these two tags are independent.

This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.