Wikidata

Property talk:P2047

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Toni 001 in topic Cook Time

Documentation

duration
length of time of an event or process
Representsduration (Q2199864)
Data typeQuantity
Template parameter"runtime" in en:Template:Infobox film
"runtime" in en:Template:Infobox television episode
"length" in en:Template:Infobox song
"length" in en:Template:Infobox album
Domain
According to this template: occurrence (Q1190554), process (Q3249551)
According to statements in the property:
occurrence (Q1190554), process (Q3249551), work (Q386724), unit of time (Q1790144), temporal entity (Q26907166), transport service itinerary (Q1067164), era (Q6428674), range of days of the week (Q99731370), level (Q1046315) or space probe (Q26529)
When possible, data should only be stored as statements
Allowed values0 ≤ 𝓧 ≤ not applicable
Allowed unitsInstances of: unit of time
second (Q11574), minute (Q7727), hour (Q25235), nychthemeron (Q11034997), day (Q573), week (Q23387), month (Q5151), annum (Q1092296), millisecond (Q723733), microsecond (Q842015), fourth-month period (Q1269724), quarter (Q1643308), academic term (Q2269240), century (Q578), year (Q577), millennium (Q36507), decade (Q39911), bar (Q3240892), beat (Q654693), sitting day (Q104161717), synodic month (Q27609543), draconitic month (Q27609659) or saros period (Q106769843)
ExampleLa Grande Vadrouille (Q487789) → 132 minute
human pregnancy (Q11995) → 38 week
baktun (Q804537) → 144,000 day
394.26 tropical year
Sonatine (Q1779888) → 12 minute
2016-2017 one-year-period (Q30201458) → 1 year
SourceInternet Movie Database (Q37312) is a good source for this kind of data for movies and episodes. Some Wikipedia articles might already have the duration listed. (note: this information should be moved to a property statement; use property source website for the property (P1896))
Robot and gadget jobsYes! Bots can update this tag automatically from Wikipedia articles itself (that have a infobox film with runtime parameter) or fetch them from the IMDb API if IMDb ID (P345) is present.
Tracking: sameno label (Q32085161)
Tracking: usageCategory:Pages using Wikidata property P2047 (Q20989794)
Tracking: local yes, WD nono label (Q32199654)
See alsoevent interval (P2257), time index (P4895), frequency (P2144)
Lists
Proposal discussionProposal discussion
Current uses
Total317,852
Main statement227,97271.7% of uses
Qualifier89,85828.3% of uses
Reference22<0.1% of uses
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
 
Range from “0” to “+∞”: values should be in the range from “0” to “+∞”. (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P2047#Range, hourly updated report
 
 
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P2047#Type Q1190554, Q3249551, Q386724, Q1790144, Q26907166, Q1067164, Q6428674, Q99731370, Q1046315, Q26529, SPARQL
 
 
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). Known exceptions: Passover (Q121393)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P2047#allowed qualifiers, SPARQL
 
Conflicts with “instance of (P31): Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P2047#Conflicts with P31, hourly updated report, SPARQL
 
Scope is as main value (Q54828448), as qualifier (Q54828449): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P2047#Scope, SPARQL
 
Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200), Wikibase MediaInfo (Q59712033): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P2047#Entity types
 
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P2047#Conflicts with P31, SPARQL
 
Check units
Unit must to be a unit of time (Q1790144) (Help)
Violations query: SELECT ?item ?unit WHERE { ?item p:P2047/psv:P2047/wikibase:quantityUnit ?unit. MINUS { ?unit wdt:P31 wd:Q1790144. }. FILTER (?unit NOT IN (wd:Q3240892)). }
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P2047#Check units
 
This property is being used by:

Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.)

Generalization of the properties edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago25 comments10 people in discussion

@Oursana, Giftzwerg 88, Robin0van0der0vliet, Danneks, ValterVB, Micru:   WikiProject Movies has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.   WikiProject Music has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.

Can we generalize the property to others fields than music, movie,... under the name "duration" ? Currently this property doesn't have anything specific constraints: use of minutes and second as units, very large range from 0-10000... Snipre (talk) 15:59, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

What do you have in mind? What would be the benefits of cleaning up everyone's mess at once? --- Jura 16:20, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
As I explained I propose to generalize this property to other fields to use it in other items like events or as qualifier for sport results or toxicology data. This implies addition of new units (hours, days,...) and the change of label to duration and neutralization of descriptions.
If there is no consensus for that, I will create the general property duration and I will delete the corresponding alias "duration" of this property and I will let you clean your mess when people will use the more generic property instead of this one in movies and songs items. Snipre (talk) 17:00, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
Running time has specific meaning, if you were to generalise that as duration it would beg the question duration of what exactly? The duration of all footage from all cameras, duration of the director's tea break, or what? So, I would say we need this specific property. Danrok (talk) 17:13, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
My English is not very good, but for me, an event has only a "point in time" (with some uncertainty), and a sport result doesn't have a duration too. As for toxicology, maybe a label with the word "permissible" is better? Danneks (talk) 19:06, 29 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
@Danneks, Jura1: Even for event you can have a duration especially when no defined start and end time is given Example: Ascension of Everest by Erhard Loretan and Jean Troillet in 43 hours the 30. August 1986. Or for record data about competition like Usain Bolt won the 100m run in 9.58 s the 16. August 2009 in Berlin.
Just for your information in German, in Spanish and in Italian this property is translated as duration (Dauer, duración, durata). In French the translation is "work duration". So if you have a really special need which requires a specific property you should explain better what is the definition in order to allow correct translation in other languages. Snipre (talk) 12:28, 2 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
@Snipre: Well, maybe this property can be generalized to (single) processes like "ascending" — a recorded work is not a process, so this should not cause a confusion. But I think that the statement on Property:P2146 (subproperty of: P2047) is wrong. Danneks (talk) 18:43, 2 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
I think it's a good idea... If it isn't too complicated, let's do it. --Rogi (talk) 19:58, 3 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
I agree too, let's rename this property to "duration" and generalise it. -Ash Crow (talk) 22:00, 19 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

For context, I am working on adding chemical exposure limits to Wikidata. One type of exposure limit specifies the maximum time window during which a certain level of exposure is acceptable, in the form "X parts per million in a Y-hour window". I proposed a generic duration property, since the "running time" property seemed to be only applicable to lengths of recorded media. If there is nothing that would prevent it from being repurposed as a generic duration property, then we should do that. James Hare (NIOSH) (talk) 17:40, 5 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

I prefer to keep them separate. Is there any benefit in mixing it? --- Jura 22:48, 19 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
Please can you provide some arguments ? The benefit of mixing are clear: one property, no risk of misuse. What are the benefits of having one property "running time" and another one "duration" ? Snipre (talk) 16:24, 20 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
I think that an exposure limit is not a duration of anything, it is a more complex property. It is not clear whether "duration: Y hours" means "maximum duration: Y hours" or something else. Danneks (talk) 16:53, 20 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
I think you don't understand the situation. The duration is relevant for toxicological data because it indicates the duration during which an animal was exposed to a substance. This is an essential part of the data because without this information you can't compare values. You can be exposed during one second to a very toxic chemical and still be alive because in one second the chemical didn't reach your lungs and you can exposed to a low toxic component and die because of it due to an exposition to it during weeks. So the value is relevant only with the duration of the experiment. Here duration will be used as qualifier for the property. Snipre (talk) 17:16, 20 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
Definitely, I don't understand... But I'm not going to use this property as a qialifier, so that's not a big problem. Danneks (talk) 20:25, 20 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

I thought it was a generic property already! I found it in the list of pending properties when we created those after the creation of the values with units. I use it for times on sled odg races (see 2015 Iditarod (Q19455277) for example). Seeing "work duration" as the property name is strange. So there is already "misusing" of this property and I don't understand what we gain with a restrictive property instead of a large one. So I   Support strongly the generalisation. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 01:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

As we have already some informations about the use of this property for other fields than works I will change the label and the description. Snipre (talk) 10:45, 5 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Note: A proposal for another "running time" property has been made, at Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work#running time. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:53, 9 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Danrok: Please read the talk page next time before reverting: 1) this property is used in other fields than music, movie or other artistic work so the problem is than your position is outdated by the reality, 2) no constraint prevents to use this property in other fields and if you take the time to look at the property page you can see that the unit of this property can be days, years or centuries, in one word nothing corresponding to what you think this property should be restricted. So unless to just revert one label in English do the job correctly and do the necessary to restrict the use of this property by using all the tools for that or to accept the real use ot the property which is far beyond your limited concept. Snipre (talk) 18:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)Reply
The definition in all languages made it clear that it shouldn't be used for anything. Obviously, it is unfortunate that the labels in some languages weren't fine tuned to the definition. Now we have two options, either we create a separate general property or a new one just for running time. The outcome would be the same. --- Jura 18:12, 15 December 2015 (UTC)Reply
But this is not the case so it's time to adapt to the reality especially when a new property proposal was started assuming that this property is a general one. The outcome is more simple than the two options you proposed because 1) this property is already used as a general one and 2) a property porposal is already started to create a specialized property. And for the next property be coherent: use constraint and define the units acoording to the purpose of the property (I am still waiting for an example of a movie with a running time of century).
Currently everything is done for a general use of this property so just focusing on the only thing which defined this property as a specialized property for movies or songs is just a joke. If somebody wants to define the property for a limited use he has to do its job and to use the tools for that. I don't like people able to spot one edit like the mine for the label but are unable to follow the hundreds of edits using this property in wrong cases: a watch dog has to do its work all the time or it has to continue to sleep like it was its habit before. Snipre (talk) 18:43, 15 December 2015 (UTC)Reply
Actually, I just checked the uses of this properties and the conclusion is: "no, it's not used as a general duration property". A proposal for a generic "time interval" property is also pending: Wikidata:Property_proposal/Generic#time_interval. --- Jura 18:55, 15 December 2015 (UTC)Reply
With the change to "duration" this property is now a mess with mixed boundaries. Films and other works do not have durations, or if they do, it's the length of time covering either their total existence (until destruction) or their production time. "Running time" does not have a meaning that is at all similar or associated with the typical meaning of "duration". I recommend splitting the uses. --Yair rand (talk) 23:01, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply
@Yair rand: Wikidata:Property_proposal/Creative_work#running_time. But we could also wait till it gets really messy ..
--- Jura 01:05, 17 January 2016 (UTC)Reply
(Now archived at Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/47#running_time, proposal failed. P2047 is now being used for >50,000 items on films and songs and such, and ~500 uses for actual durations.) --Yair rand (talk) 18:42, 1 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Cook Time edit

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

@Toni 001: Should I propose a new property? I was using this one on instances of recipe (Q219239) to indicate how long the recipe takes to complete. U+1F360 (talk) 13:38, 18 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

In the context of (physical) quantities, there is a hierarchy with "duration" on top and many specializations below, like "period duration", "half life", "age", "reverberation time", .... In the case of recipes, I could imagine that there are various durations, like the overall preparation time, the cooking/baking/frying time, ... . If it is clear which one is meant then using this general property might be fine. Though I'm not an expert in recipes and therefore leave it to you or other food experts. Toni 001 (talk) 08:46, 19 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Property_talk:P2047&oldid=2071727884"
Return to "P2047" page.