Wikidata:Property proposal/field of view

field of view edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Term

Done: field of view (P4036) (Talk and documentation)

Description	extent of the observable world that can be seen or sensed by the item
Data type	Quantity
Domain	sensors, optical devices, etc.
Allowed units	degree, minute of arc, second of arc, radian, steradian, square degree, square minute
Example	No. 30 Sighting Telescope (Q29048358) → 21 degree (Q28390)

Motivation

Distinct spec for items with a field of view. Existing properties don't seem to do the job. Josh Baumgartner (talk) 04:18, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Support --Mr. Moonlight (talk) 23:50, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support sounds good to me ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:05, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there prior art of how this property gets called elsewhere? ChristianKl (talk) 08:51, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:55, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Joshbaumgartner: I removed the "ready" from this property proposal as I am now confused about what precisely you intended here. According to en:Field of view there are several different definitions of "field of view", including "angular field of view" (which seems to match your example), "linear field of view", and "angular area viewed by the instrument, in square degrees" which seems to measure a solid angle as your description suggests. Which is it? And if the first is intended, I think this property should be renamed "angular field of view" and of course the description fixed. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:34, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ArthurPSmith: There are different ways to measure field of view, but instead of making separate properties for each, I would think qualifiers would be able to allow this differentiation (determination method (P459) and object has role (P3831) come to mind). I've removed the 'solid angle' part from the description to avoid confusion. Josh Baumgartner (talk) 16:40, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Joshbaumgartner, Mr. Moonlight, ChristianKl, Pigsonthewing: Ok, everything looked ready, so - Done ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:16, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]