Am 06.05.2013 23:55, schrieb Peter Wendorff: > Am 06.05.2013 23:07, schrieb andrzej zaborowski: >> If you're not adding those historical entities to OSM (or a similar >> database like that historical osm once discussed) then there's no >> issue with linking to Wikidata because there's nothing to be linked. > > Why not?
It wouldn't add any information. The hospital should be linked to the building _within_ Wikidata anyway because there are more properties that can be attached to a building than just a OSM building outline. So if we connect the OSM building and the Wikidata building, then the hospital is already (though Wikidata) linked to the OSM building, too. >> If it doesn't occupy the entire building then you can probably add the >> museum tag on the building geometry but later once you want to add a >> wikidata tag you'd probably split it out like you'd split a street >> object when you want to add an attribute that applies to a part of the >> attribute. If you're into indoor mapping then you'd draw the museum >> outline separately anyway. > so you propose to split it up because of an external ID you propose to > add... > While I in general agree that objects of osm are split when they get > mapped in more detail (like in this example), I'm not happy to do that > for the reason to enable matching to external references. Using the same OSM element for two distinct features actually contradicts a strict one feature, one OSM element principle. We do it anyway because it's convenient, but as soon as you want to add the same tag - whether it's name, opening_hours, or wikidata - to both features, you create two separate elements. That's not a special treatment of external IDs, but consistent with other tags, and using two separate elements is semantically better anyway. > and it's not working for opening_hours either afaik; usually we split > the pois in these cases. Exactly. > Wikidata links are harder to maintain, nearly impossible to check > (without opening the page), while wikipedia links have meaningful names. YMMV, but I always open Wikipedia links to check whether they are (still) correct. > Therefore I personally oppose currently to reference wikidata entities > from osm objects; at least where no good rules exist where and when to > link which types of objects, and which not. I think a good rule to start with would be: If there is a Wikipedia or Wikidata entry about that particular feature *itself*, then it can always be linked (using the appropriate key). Such links cannot possibly be replaced with links within Wikidata, and there is a limited number of them. With the namespaced links, however, we indeed get an essentially unbounded number of potential links and I don't know a good rule for these atm. Tobias _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
