Wikidata:Property proposal/Evighetsrunor

EvighetsrunorEdit

Return to Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

   Under discussion
DescriptionSwedish rune project about runic inscriptions "Evighetsrunor"
Representsrunic inscription (Q7379880)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainitem
Example 1Rök Runestone (Q472975)3a61c080-77fc-4a44-b5ac-f3a4b33b3aab
Example 2Upplands runinskrifter 668 (Q18334393)aaac190b-88b5-4a90-abe7-98deae52c5b4
Example 3Uppland Runic Inscription 792 (Q19979013)42fa16bf-8600-41a2-a487-a848070424a8
Sourceapp.raa.se/open/runor/search_results
Planned useused in Wikipedia articles
Number of IDs in source7189
Expected completeness100%
Formatter URLhttp://kulturarvsdata.se/uu/srdb/$1
See alsoScandinavian Runic-text Database (P1261)

MotivationEdit

This new application "Evighetsrunor" is available through an aggregator K-samsök that is Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260). My argument is that having a specific properties is more as we do in Wikidata and will make easer to write templates and do SPARQL etc... Salgo60 (talk) 19:52, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Update 2021-mar-27: @Abbe98, Biltvätt: I have now implemented "datarountripping" and Linked Runes to books pages at Swedish Literature Bank (Q10567910) see meta.wikimedia.org Structured_data_for_GLAM-Wiki/Roundtripping/KMB I still think having a dedicated property for Evighetsrunor makes sense and make it easier for ex. Swedish Literature Bank (Q10567910) to understand how to link Evighetsrunor. Tools like hub.toolforge.org would make it possible for Swedish Literature Bank (Q10567910) to use Scandinavian Runic-text Database (P1261) to link Evighetsrunor. Also linking directly to Everlasting Runes I feels will make it possible to easier link from articles in Wikipedia that creates a search

- Salgo60 (talk) 06:45, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

  Oppose It's one line of SPARQL. Let's not duplicate the information into two properties it will just get out of sync and we still need it in P1260 for things like federated SPARQL and general discovery. Abbe98 (talk) 20:02, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

  CommentPlease do a POC and show how it will work as Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) now will contain a lot of things related to a runic inscription (Q7379880) in different ways I guess we need a way of understanding from the Linked data in Wikidata what a specific identifier will contain....
If we should select the right Property value from Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) you need qualifiers etc... this suggestion is a more clean and easy maintained Wikidata way having dedicated properties for each of the systems. We also have a year long discussion of the quality of the data in Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) so I feel people have less trust in the K-samsök approach that is impossible for Wikidata to clean if K-samsök is not doing the homework see Swedish Wikipedia discussion - Salgo60 (talk) 12:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Update now has some objects from Evighetsrunor been added to Wikidata in Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) I feel we get a mess as Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) will both have links to "Fornsök" that is geometric areas and "Evighetsrunor" that is runic inscription (Q7379880). You need to check the values and if it contains a string to understand what resource its is linking... feels not like good Linked data ;-) and asking for problems...
- Salgo60 (talk) 05:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

  Oppose For the same reasons as Abbe98. It's impossible to know, based solely on the URI, "what" a record in SOCH represents. You have to resolve the URI and read the RDF to know if it's a record for a building, a monument, an artefact, a photo… SOCH URIs from Runor of the form uu/srdb typically represent the physical objects that bear the inscriptions rather than the inscriptions themselves. This is why many of them are owl:sameAs other records representing the same physical objects. The current property Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) describes a link connecting a Wikidata object to a matching SOCH object. An identity; that's all. Inventing different properties for all the different item types in SOCH seems like it would be very difficult to manage, especially as you can't tell the item type just by looking at the URI, with little real benefit. Biltvätt (talk) 10:01, 8 February 2021 (UTC)