date or point in time when the item was discovered or invented
Range from “-77986-00-00T00:00:00Z” to “now”: values should be in the range from “-77986-00-00T00:00:00Z” to “now”. (Help)Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Known exceptions: Omega molecule (Q61041102)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P575#Range, SPARQL (new)
Formatting the date valueEdit
Hello, I have been working on an semi-automated template for asteroids here, but when I call this Property I get the date in English. I can't get the date correctly formatted in basque language. Does anyone know how to make it? -Theklan (talk) 12:10, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Rethinking this propertyEdit
(Possibly relevant statistics: This property is used on 51265 pages. All but 1205 also have discoverer or inventor (P61).)
Things can be discovered multiple times, by multiple people. However, we currently have no way of linking the separate time of discovery or invention (P575) and discoverer or inventor (P61) statements to each other, leaving ambiguous when any particular discoverer's discovery took place. There are a few ways this could be remedied:
- P575 could be deleted, and replaced with point in time (P585) as a qualifier of discoverer or inventor (P61). Problems: This makes it impossible to add the time without the discoverer, and also doesn't work well for discoveries by groups of people.
- P61 could be deleted, and replaced by a new property that would qualify P575 to show the discoverer. Problem: This makes it impossible to show the discoverer without the time.
- Either P575 or P61 could be changed to also be usable as a qualifier in particular cases where there were multiple discoveries, so as to link the data points. Problem: Introduces inconsistency in the data model, harder to query things.
- If something is discovered multiple times, all but the first could be ignored. Problem: Leaving out potentially useful data.
- @Yair rand: you are wrong in 1 and 2, because we can set "unknown value" and "no value"
- I think it would make more sense to use some property + qualifier.
- Claims at hydroponics (Q191667) are not "connected" to each other
- I prefer to have dates as qualifiers. d1g (talk) 13:24, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
not for "invented"?Edit
Time of invention vs. time of publicationEdit
Q8021247 was designed and built in 1944, but made public in April 1947. Is there a way to state both (which qualifiers?) or which one should prevail? Retired electrician (talk) 11:32, 10 February 2018 (UTC)