Hoi,
I have been thinking about this. I think the current approach is wrong. I
think it is the properties where Wikipedians rightfully want to be able to
use a text as a label that fits their need. Restricting this is probably
wrong.
It is in the Q values that we do NOT want editors to make a change,
obviously. I intent to write more about this.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 9 July 2015 at 12:15, Daniel Kinzler <[email protected]> wrote:
> Before I reply to what you wrote Gerard, let me summarize the question we
> actually need to answer to go forward:
>
> * currently, property values can be accessed from wikitext using the
> property's
> (unique) label. Do we want to keep this? (the alternative is access via
> P-ids only)
>
> * if yes, should it be possible to change a property's label at all?
>
> * if yes, should references to the old label break, or should they
> continue to work?
>
> * if they should continue to work, should this be achieved by making the
> old
> label an alias?
>
> * if no, how should it be achieved, exactly?
>
>
>
> Am 09.07.2015 um 11:54 schrieb Gerard Meijssen:
> > Hoi,
> > The parser would understand it because it stored information. The
> property is
> > still the same property, the label it uses is now seen as a local
> overrride.
>
> That would be a completely new system, and quite complicated. It would also
> introduce a host of new issues (such local overrides may conflict with new
> names, or other local overrides, for instance. Language fallback makes
> this even
> more fun. Not to mention that we currently don't have a good place to
> store this
> kind of information).
>
> The current proposal is to store those overrides in wikidata, as aliases.
>
> > Daniel, there are many ways to solve this. The problem you face is based
> on a
> > misconception. Language are not meant for rigidity.
>
> Indeed. But names can be chosen to be unique. We do that all the time when
> naming pages. And when naming properties. Property names (labels) were
> always
> meant to be unique, this is nothing new. (For a while, there was a bug that
> allowed duplicate labels under *some* circumstances, sorry for that).
>
> > Expectting that you can has
> > already been shown to be problematic. Consequently persisting on labels
> to be
> > always unique is a problem of your own choosing. A problem that will not
> go away
> > and is easiest solved now.
>
> If we drop the requirement that properties should be accessible from
> wikitext
> via their name, then yes, that would be easy. If people can live with using
> P-Ids directly, that's fine with me.
>
> > It is abundantly clear that you WILL use the requirement of Wikidata as
> an
> > excuse when a language has no alternative.
>
> Excuse for what? From a programming perspective, making people use IDs is
> by far
> the simplest solution. It's easy enough for remove support for label based
> access to properties, if that support is not needed.
>
> Allowing access from wikitext using non-unique names, THAT is not
> something I
> would want to support. I can't imagine how that would work at all.
>
> --
> Daniel Kinzler
> Senior Software Developer
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland
> Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
