Wikidata:Property proposal/constraint

lexeme of property constraint edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

Not done

Description	qualifier to define a property constraint in combination with P2302
Data type	Lexeme
Example	similar to P2305
See also	item of property constraint (P2305): qualifier to define a property constraint in combination with "property constraint" (P2302)

exception to constraint (lexeme) edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

Not done

Description	lexeme that is an exception to the constraint, qualifier to define a property constraint in combination with P2302
Data type	Lexeme
Example	similar to P2303
See also	exception to constraint (P2303): item that is an exception to the constraint, qualifier to define a property constraint in combination with P2302

Motivation

Notified participants of WikiProject property constraints

Supposedly we would need to adapt to the new namespace. Forms might need the same. Feel free to add above.
--- Jura 09:13, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Comment a lexeme version of exception to constraint (P2303) could make sense, but do you have any uses in mind for “lexeme of property constraint”? Lexemes as constraint parameters? --Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 13:26, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE): I haven't come across one yet.
"Language", "Lexical Category" and "Grammatical features" should eventually be available in constraints.
Maybe lexeme requires lexical category constraint (Q55819078) and lexeme requires language constraint (Q55819106) should be implemented. @Ivan A. Krestinin: could this already be done for the constraint reports?
--- Jura 06:48, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cold you add these constraint to some property? This makes debugging more simple. — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 07:24, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. @Ivan A. Krestinin: at conjugation class (P5186), auxiliary verb (P5401) for the first and tone or pitch accent class (P5426) for the second.
--- Jura 07:34, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I implemented these constraints, but have no time to execute full testing. Please notify me if something goes wrong. The nearest update is in progress already. It will fail with "unsupported constraint" error. The next update must produce appropriate result. — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 12:38, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Filed phabricator:T200688 and phabricator:T200689. It has some open questions for Jura1 and Ivan A. Krestinin, please take a look.

Also, why are the labels of those constraint types so inconsistent both with each other (“lexeme requires” vs. “required by this lexeme”) and with all other constraint types (typically end in “… constraint”)? --Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 13:07, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ivan A. Krestinin, Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE): Thanks! I will check the reports once updated.
(a) For both, I think several values should be possible, especially as they can easily evolve. In the meantime, I also added the second constraint to Han character in this lexeme (P5425) with two values.
(b) The check could easily apply to statements added on forms (or senses once available). It might take some time to dig up samples.
The labels should indeed be improved, especially as all other values include "constraint" in the English label ;)
--- Jura 13:38, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
it works! on constraint reports. There are currently five properties using it. Thanks.
--- Jura 23:33, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing: could uses in Wikidata property example for lexemes (P5192) (or Wikidata property example for forms (P5193)) be ignored for scope? Wikidata:Database_reports/Constraint_violations/P5526#"Scope"_violations and the gadget on Property:P5526#P5192 currently show violations. I don't think this happens when Wikidata property example (P1855) or possibly Wikidata property example for properties (P2271) is being used.
--- Jura 07:20, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed for reports. — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 08:41, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fix for WBQC pending in gerrit:449017 – thanks Matěj Suchánek! --Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 12:45, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE), Matěj Suchánek: looks like it was already in the works. Could it be pushed on? It seems stuck for now.
--- Jura 06:10, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

marking as Not done as the changes to the constraint system were done independently − Pintoch (talk) 14:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]