Property talk:P4179

Latest comment: 6 years ago by S-1-5-7 in topic Data structure

Documentation

tabular population
same as population (P1082); used when there is data for many different points in time
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
Scope is as main value (Q54828448): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P4179#Scope, hourly updated report, SPARQL
Item “population (P1082): Items with this property should also have “population (P1082)”. (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/P4179#Item P1082, SPARQL
Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200): 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/P4179#Entity types
Link to Commons namespace “Data”: this property should contain a well-formed link to an existing page on Wikimedia Commons. (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P4179#Commons link, hourly updated report
Format “(?i).+\.tab: value must be formatted using this pattern (PCRE syntax). (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P4179#Format, hourly updated report, SPARQL

Data structure edit

Is there any way we can standardize these data so that a software client understands that the software client understands that in commons:Data:Taipei Population.tab "1337350" refers the female population in February 2001. Ideally, I suppose the header would have a reference to a Wikidata item for female population. -Zolo (talk) 08:12, 27 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

I updated the sample data to a later revision (per the talk section on the original proposal). The headers are more easy to parse now. S-1-5-7 (talk) 15:05, 27 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
Is the text in the headers after the underscore really necessary? I feel like it just confuses things. Also, I don't suppose there are any constraints that work with this datatype that would help enforce the standard? (If there isn't, is there a place to propose new constraint types?) --Yair rand (talk) 00:15, 5 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
@Yair: They make it more human readable and it would be trivial to parse out in code (e.g., regex "^([PS]\d+)"). They wouldn't even need to be standardised since the P###/S### is the only important part. I am not sure about the constraints.S-1-5-7 (talk) 07:19, 5 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Return to "P4179" page.