Posted under Tags
BUR #59881 has been rejected.
create alias red_dot_sight -> reflex_sight
According to web search results overview, all reflex sights are red dots, but not all red dots (like holographic sights) are reflex sights.
Since both type of optics share similar external appearance regardless of specific model and manufacturer: Flat-bodied with a framed panel of lens where the reticle is projected while lacking magnification power, instead of a tube.
Updated by World Funeral
BUR #59882 has been rejected.
create alias red_dot_sight -> optical_sight
create alias reflex_sight -> optical_sight
Alternate option.
scope is an optical sight too. If we need a tag for non-magnifying sights that does not include scopes then it should not have an ambiguous name like optical sight.
The alternative is implying scope and reflex sight both to optical sight.
We also have sight_magnifier and dual_sights which appear to be for the same concept btw, and laser_sight which appears to be often mistaken for red dot sight.
nonamethanks said in forum #441582:
scope is an optical sight too. If we need a tag for non-magnifying sights that does not include scopes then it should not have an ambiguous name like optical sight.
The alternative is implying scope and reflex sight both to optical sight.
Thanks for the feedback. I just opened a separate topic #36300 for the optical_sight vs scope issue.
We also have sight_magnifier and dual_sights which appear to be for the same concept btw, and laser_sight which appears to be often mistaken for red dot sight.
Updated BUR #59976. And of course I have to clean up laser_sight first since it's just an attachment that projects laser to the target.
I see someone take the laser_sight as eye_beam in post #11426268...
Guess no matter how we change the tag name we can never completely avoid ambiguity...
Hi, bit of a gun nut here, and a first suggestion so I apologize if I am missing any due diligence.
Being brand new here I hesitate to suggest a concrete sweeping change, however I can see a bit of a pattern in red_dot_sight as having a variety of red dots while the reflex tag seems to often be the single panel red dots.
I apologize if I go too far into specifics, but could red_dot_sight become a parent tag for different tags of these two (and maybe separate holographic sights as well)?
I'll tentatively suggest a set that distinguishes these but may be too technical in naming:
create implication trijicon_rmr -> open_emitter_red_dot_sight
create implication aimpoint -> closed_emitter_red_dot_sight
create implication eotech_exps3 -> holographic_sight
create implication holographic_sight -> red_dot_sight
create implication open_emitter_red_dot_sight -> red_dot_sight
create implication closed_emitter_red_dot_sight -> red_dot_sight
This creates three subsets that I feel encompass current red dot sight types, populates them with examples to start, and has the subsets imply red dot sight.
While holographic_sight does violate tag what is seen not known, it does so in the same manner as reflex_sight and can be indicated visually by the boxy nature of holographic sights.
This would require reflex_sight and red_dot_sight to be reorganized accordingly though.
As for laser_sight, is lam_unit widely known enough to be a different name? Just a different name for them, laser aiming modules.
cattossss said in forum #452627:
Being brand new here I hesitate to suggest a concrete sweeping change, however I can see a bit of a pattern in red_dot_sight as having a variety of red dots while the reflex tag seems to often be the single panel red dots.
I apologize if I go too far into specifics, but could red_dot_sight become a parent tag for different tags of these two (and maybe separate holographic sights as well)?
As a technical note, BURs are created through the BURs link at the top of the page (under the forum tab) while you are in the forum thread.
My thoughts on the proposal itself:
Open vs. closed emitter red dot sights are technically visually distinct, but in practice for most art I think very few users care to distinguish or tag them. I don't think the tag would be useless but it seems like it could end up ungardened.
Holographic sight could perhaps have value in some POV art but as mentioned seems "canon-taggy". (It's not as if red dot sight itself isn't, especially with how some closed emitter red dot sights look.)
I don't like implying specific brands and models to broader gentags as my personal preference.
I would say LAM unit is probably not widely casually known but a more objective issue could be confusion with laser target designators.
The bulk update request #59881 (forum #440993) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
The bulk update request #59882 (forum #440994) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
