mkroetzsch added a comment. Thanks for adding Denny. Long reply, but details matter here.
I agree that there are different things one could talk about (document, real thing). However, for now I am mainly interested in talking about the latter, since this should be our primary concern in Wikibase (the document is a thing MediaWiki has to care about). Now you argue that certain triples should not be given for the real thing (whether related to the reified statements or to the item type). However, your arguments do not have an objective foundation: the only reason why you do not want to have certain triples is that you interpret them to mean something that would not be true, whereas I am interpreting the very same triples in a way that would be correct. In other words, we have a dispute about the meaning of triples. Interestingly, the triples we discuss primarily refer to vocabulary that we created for the very purpose of being used in these triples. How could it mean the wrong thing? Only if we define it to mean the wrong thing. Therefore, let's just define those triples to mean the right thing and we are all set. There is no technical discussion to be had here; it's all about desired or undesired interpretations. If you look at the RDF structures that we get if we want to represent all of our data (without even including its order), then it should be clear that these structures simply do not have any self-evident "natural" interpretation. We need to tell people what they mean. Let's just tell them what we think they should mean. The only thing to keep in mind (and this is also what you are saying) is that we cannot use the same URI to mean different things in different contexts, so we need different URIs for referring to the class of real-world items and for referring to the class of item documents. I do not see a problem with this. An RDF document represents a graph. It is a purely abstract, mathematical model. Nothing is said there about the real world or about documents or about truth. It's all in our heads. The reason why we are so careful to distinguish documents from real things etc. is that we want to make sure that the data as a whole (taking all RDF from one site together) still makes sense. Yet, we are free to define this sense. We could define a property that means "is described on a Wikipedia page that was once edited by someone who was born in". Would this say something about the real George Washington? Sure. For the same reason, please do not confuse reification in RDF (which represents a triple without stating that the triple is true) with reification in our export (which simply uses an auxiliary resource to make a statement). Using auxiiary nodes in RDF data is a common technique that does not have any impact on whether you are saying something about the real world or whether you are saying that a document made a certain claim. In particular, it is not any stronger or more direct to use one triple to represent a statement than to use a group of triples around an auxiliary node. You always need to document in your ontology what your RDF structures express. Whether we need to use different subject URIs for simplified and for reified exports I don't know. Maybe it also depends on the exact way in which the simplified export is created. Already in our RDF exports, we are using different property URIs in both cases, so even in the union of the datasets there would never be any doubt as to which triple belongs to which view on the data. Moreover, many triples are the same in both views (e.g., labels). Therefore I am inclined to think that there is no need for different URIs there. (I don't see the connection to your truthy projection if you just use it for answering queries, unless of course you are returning query results in RDF so that these results would turn into another kind of RDF export that needs to be consistent with those we have now.) TASK DETAIL https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T89949 REPLY HANDLER ACTIONS Reply to comment or attach files, or !close, !claim, !unsubscribe or !assign <username>. EMAIL PREFERENCES https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: daniel, mkroetzsch Cc: Denny, Smalyshev, mkroetzsch, Aklapper, daniel, Wikidata-bugs, Jdouglas, aude _______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
