@NWF_Renim: Because if you implicate snowing into snow,...

NWF_Renim
2011-02-12T07:58:06-05:00

Because if you implicate snowing into snow, you're just going to have to have another subtag ground_snow to replace what the current snow tag is. The upper umbrella tag then becomes nothing more than a dumping ground tag for people who don't want to bother to further subdivide what type of snow is depicted. So unless the uploader or tagger then tags the image with either ground_snow or snowing, they've then just creating more work for someone else then to have to go and tag the image either snowing or ground_snow.

We've already acknowledged that the appearances in the images are different, which is why they were left separate, and why a ground_snow tag would have to be made if you implicate them.

Lets look at it like this. You don't want snow to be used for all types of snow, which would by like not wanting water to include all types of water (like tears). But you want snow to be a combination of ground_snow and falling_snow, because they're both snow. Now what if there were only two major types of images with water, lakes and rain and I proposed that they should be put under the umbrella tag water, that's fine right? Now what if people were only tagging water for images of lakes or images of rain? Wouldn't you have a problem with that? The effects may be composed of the same substance, but that doesn't always mean they should be put together and only tagged just the umbrella, because now someone else is going to have to come along and tag them with the subtags.

I guess we can agree to disagree, as I doubt we'll ever see eye to eye.