On 11.11.2015 11:33, Thomas Douillard wrote:
There is a proposal for some kind of class disjointness :
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Generic#subclass this
is here for a while now, maybe a few more supporters would speed up the
process :)
Interesting. This looks like a more complex modelling that combines
"union of" with "disjoint classes". I would prefer to have the simpler
modelling primitives before introducing such a shortcut.
There is also an slight mismatch between the Wikidata statement format
(with main value and qualifiers) and the use for assigning a set of
values (two classes, that are equally important). It's clear that we
have to do something like this if we want to make such statements, but I
would prefer an encoding where the classes are both in qualifiers, e.g.:
<nucleon (Q102165)> Disjoint union of SOME VALUE
of <proton (Q2294)>
of <neutron (Q2348)>
This is also similar to what is done in OWL, and we already have the
"of" qualifier.
Will add this comment.
I think a proposal for "DisjointWith" was rejected a long time ago. But
another one could pass.
Yes, I think we should revisit this decision in the light of the new
requirements and our grown experience in working with Wikidata.
Markus
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
