Open main menu

Wikidata:Property proposal/constraint

Contents

lexeme of property constraintEdit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

   Not done
Descriptionqualifier to define a property constraint in combination with P2302
Data typeLexeme
Examplesimilar to P2305
See alsoitem of property constraint (P2305): qualifier to define a property constraint in combination with P2302

exception to constraint (lexeme)Edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

   Not done
Descriptionlexeme that is an exception to the constraint, qualifier to define a property constraint in combination with P2302
Data typeLexeme
Examplesimilar to P2303
See alsoexception to constraint (P2303): item that is an exception to the constraint, qualifier to define a property constraint in combination with P2302


Motivation

Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE)
Jarekt - mostly interested in properties related to Commons
MisterSynergy
John Samuel
Sannita
Yair rand
Jon Harald Søby
Pasleim
Jura
PKM
ChristianKl
Sjoerddebruin
Salgo60
Fralambert
Manu1400
Was a bee
Malore
Ivanhercaz
Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Pizza1016
Ogoorcs
ZI Jony
  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)

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)
  • Cold you add these constraint to some property? This makes debugging more simple. — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 07:24, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
  • 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)
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)
  • @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)
  •   it works! on constraint reports. There are currently five properties using it. Thanks.
    --- Jura 23:33, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
  • marking as   Not done as the changes to the constraint system were done independently − Pintoch (talk) 14:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)