Hi. I understand your argument but I think there is an underlying incorrect
assumption : template editors are actually ... Templates developers. Not
regular editors. It's only a fraction of editors who actually touched a
template in their life. (Maybe there is numbers somewhere)

With that in mind, the question become: will this change be any useful for
those who already edited templates (my guess is barely) and for those who
did never edited a template the same question can be asked. What stopped
them until now, will Wikidata change anything to this, and lastly ... Will
this feature  have any influence at all ? I'm really  dubious it's worth
the trouble pictured like that. But I could be wrong. It would take more
than a blogpost to convince me though ;)
Le 11 juil. 2015 09:29, "Gerard Meijssen" <[email protected]> a
écrit :

> Hoi,
> I blogged about it. My argument is that Wikipedia should not be fenced in
> by assumptions from Wikidata.
> Thanks,
>       GerardM
>
>
> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2015/07/wikidata-dont-fence-wikipedia-in.html
>
> On 10 July 2015 at 17:35, Gerard Meijssen <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> 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
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Reply via email to