[remove] tag required to inherit [name]

[Galgana]

I wanted to test how to handle modding with tree species, so I had my character fell a spruce tree.
But then I ran into a problem:

Code: [Select]

[SUBMENU_START:utility article]

.Wooden effigy. "Branch" *TIMBERCRAFT* /1/ [effort:0] [noquality]
//{Tree trunk} [name:%s effigy] [naming:first word]
//{Tree trunk} [name:%s effigy] [naming:last word]
//{Tree trunk} [name:%s effigy] [naming:original]
{Tree trunk} [remove] [name:%s effigy] [naming:first word]

[SUBMENU_END:utility article]The lines I commented out were ineffective since they produced only unlabeled wooden effigys.
The last line successfully produced a spruce effigy.

Depleting the [name] source item isn't always convenient (though that'll depend on whatever is being crafted).
Will it be possible for [name] strings to be applied without the [remove] tag?

And on the side, can we get stacks of modded items ending in "-y" corrected to "-ies"?

[Sami]

Hmm, let's see.
[name] and [naming] tags are activated within functions that scan the final list of materials/resources used in the crafting - and only the things that get removed in the process will end up on that list. That's how it works internally.
Well it would be possible, but possibly rather costly, to add separate block of code to scan things differently - and at least at this point of workflow I see this as a low priority.

And on the side, can we get stacks of modded items ending in "-y" corrected to "-ies"?

Yes, new plural bending rules can be added quite easily but as they affect to all the items it needs to considered properly.
In most cases "-y" -> "-ies" is the way to go, but then if somebody would want to make clay turkeys or bone keys....
I think proper grammar rule here would be; if the word ends with a consonant + “y” then it turns into "-ies", with a wovel + "y" it's the usual "+s".
I'll see about this.