GoranSMilovanovic added a comment.

  @Addshore Well, now it sounds even more complicated than in the ticket 
description.
  
  I am for a call on this too. Let me just provide a few observations in 
relation to what has been said and suggested until now.
  
  > I do not think we want to use the wb_changes table.
  
  Why? Its documentation 
<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikibase/Schema/wb_changes> says that the 
`change_info` field "Stores the new full page data in JSON format",  and given 
that this schema also holds the `change_revision_id` (docs: "This is equal to 
the rev_id of the edit made by user") this sounds exactly as what we need? Once 
again, under these assumptions, we (1) might use `wmf.mediawiki_history` to 
select the revisions that we are interested in (as @WMDE-leszek explains in the 
task description), then (2) use the `wb_changes` to fetch the JSON 
representations selecting by `rev_id` as a key, and then (3) compare the JSON 
representations to see if a change in statement value is followed by a change 
in a statement's reference. What is wrong with this approach, before we abandon 
it?
  
  > (2) use the API to collect the JSON representation of the revised entity by 
revision-id,
  > Note, this will have to be done using Special:EntityData and the revision 
parameter (wbgetentities doesn't have this functionality)
  
  @Addshore Thanks for a hint on this one. However, I am not sure if 
`wmf.mediawiki_history` and the API are the way to go at all, since:
  
  - the `wmf.mediawiki_history` receives a monthly update only, constraining 
our reporting to monthly updates too, while
  - making tons of API calls also does not sound feasible.
  
  > Without adding anything to wikibase i guess the general approach has to be:
  > Find revisions that touch statement mainsnak values and or references
  > Considerations:
  > These values can be touched using a variety of different api modules and 
with a variety of different summaries, so not just wbsetclaim-update, if 
anything working with a blacklist of summaries might be easier (eliminate 
things that only touch terms for examples)
  
  @Addshore Define "summaries" and "blacklist of summaries" please.
  
  > Fetch the entity either side of the change and see what happened and 
classify that?
  
  @Addshore Now this I don't even understand.
  
  > Once this has been done for a window of data try to figure out exactly what 
is happening to the statements based on the classifications?
  
  @Addshore Neither do I understand what do you mean here.

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T240466

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: GoranSMilovanovic
Cc: Aklapper, Addshore, Jan_Dittrich, hoo, rosalieper, noarave, Tarrow, 
Lydia_Pintscher, GoranSMilovanovic, WMDE-leszek, Sarai-WMDE, darthmon_wmde, 
Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, 
aude, Mbch331
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs

Reply via email to