| Pintoch added a comment. |
@Lydia_Pintscher yes indeed! For instance the aggregation at batch-level would probably not be meaningful for inverse constraints (unless there is a way to detect all the violations added and solved by an edit, not just on the item where the edit was made). But isn't this a problem that you have anyway, even when storing only the latest violations? For instance, if I add a "subclass of (P279)" statement between two items, don't you need to recompute type violations for all items which are instances of some transitive subclass of the new subclass? I am not sure how this invalidation is done at the moment.
Maybe it is too hard to store the entire violations reports for previous revisions, but it might be feasible for you to expose some statistics about the changes in the violations for each edit? If you have some clever invalidation logic to deal with changes of violations on other items, and if the invalidated violations are recomputed immediately after, it might even be doable to include these in the statistics?
That all sounds pretty hard to me and I don't want to hijack your thread!
Cc: Lydia_Pintscher, Pintoch, Tpt, Smalyshev, Eevans, daniel, mobrovac, Jonas, Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Aklapper, Addshore, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, merbst, LawExplorer, Agabi10, Hardikj, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Mbch331, fgiunchedi
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list Wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
