So, we should be able to formally specify the "domain" of identifiers. Perhaps 
that could be derived from the type constraints in linked properties, but I 
think it would make sense as an explicit property on the identifier.

Some identifiers, e.g., GND, VIAF, require special attention because they span 
multiple domains. A person identifer from GND bears other opportunities for 
cross-linking than an organization identifier. No idea so far how to handle 
that ...

Cheers, Joachim


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Wikidata [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von
> Antonin Delpeuch (lists)
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2018 10:57
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: Re: [Wikidata] Metadata about Persistent Identifiers
> 
> Hi Andy,
> 
> Thanks, there seems to be quite a lot of work to do in this area indeed!
> 
> 
> On 20/02/2018 19:49, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> > As an example, I created 'KoreaMed Unique Identifier':
> >
> >    https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q47489994
> >
> > How could we improve that? What additional properties might we need?
> > What properties already exist, that we could make use of?
> 
> I have recently proposed to create a "number of records" property to store the
> number of identifiers in a given scheme:
> 
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/number_of_record
> s
> 
> This property could typically apply here. The idea behind this property is 
> that
> we could compare its values to the number of uses of the corresponding
> property in Wikidata.
> 
> One other thing I would love to see happening on Wikidata is keeping track of
> the links between identifier schemes. If identifier X and identifier Y are 
> both
> used by the same database Z, then we can probably use Z to "match" X to Y and
> conversely.
> 
> If we had many "uses (P2283)" and "used by (P1535)" statements to link
> identifiers to databases, we could then draw a graph of identifiers and
> databases using them. Given two identifiers, we could analyze the paths
> between these two identifiers…
> 
> For now the graph is a bit sparse: http://tinyurl.com/y89u3enx
> 
> (And you can already see one issue: even if we have a path from ORCID to ISNI,
> that does not mean that we can convert an ORCID id to an ISNI for the same
> person via this path, as GRID contains ISNIs for organizations
> only…)
> 
> Thanks a lot Andy for adding such statements on
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q43649390 by the way!
> 
> >
> >
> > Also, this query:
> >
> >    http://tinyurl.com/y6wdrbhd
> >
> > returns over 5000 instances/ subclasses of "unique identifier"
> > (Q6545185) but includes both /types/ of identifiers (like the example
> > above) and individual identifier values, like ".ar" as an internet TLD
> > (domain name itself - Q32635 - is a subclass, not an instance, of UID)
> > - how should we distinguish between the two classes?
> 
> Urgh, that's messy. I think I would just change the ontology:
> "domain name" (Q32635) should not be a subclass of "unique identifier"
> (Q6545185), but rather an instance of it. (Actually the uniqueness is 
> debatable,
> I don't think DNS is meant to enforce any uniqueness at all, as it is very
> common for a website to have multiple domain names. So maybe just "domain
> name" "instance of" "identifier (Q853614)" would do).
> 
> Antonin
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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