Wikidata:Property proposal/form of property constraint

form of property constraint edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Lexemes

Not done

Description	qualifier to define a form constraint in combination with "property constraint" (P2302)
Data type	Form
Example 1	generational suffix (P8017): property constraint (P2302) → one-of constraint (Q21510859) → THIS property → Junior (L252247) (#F2)
Example 2	generational suffix (P8017): property constraint (P2302) → one-of constraint (Q21510859) → THIS property → Senior (L252248) (#F2)
Example 3	MISSING
Planned use	property constraint (P2302) for forms properties
See also	item of property constraint (P2305)

Motivation edit

I have not worked much with Lexeme related property but I think this could be useful. Should work somewhat similar to item of property constraint (P2305) Premeditated (talk) 10:11, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

Comment It seems more like a "one-of-constraint". Not sure if that works for generational suffix (P8017) as it can have plenty of values. --- Jura 10:43, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is true. Could be added with reason for deprecated rank (P2241) → constraint provides suggestions for manual input (Q99460987). The property can also be used as qualifier for none-of constraint (Q52558054). There are not many properties that has data type form, yet. - Premeditated (talk) 13:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lexemes are associated with languages; it seems to me you want an item value here that is language-independent? Which the existing one-of-constraint should handle? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but I see that the property (ies?) in question is (are) form-valued. And I see the analogy with the item-valued one. Ok,

Support I guess. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:28, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notified participants of WikiProject property constraints

I removed the "ready" flag. Proposing new property constraint properties should happen in discussion with the Wikiproject for property constraints given that it needs additional programming work.

@Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE): Are there any issues with adding this property into the constraint system? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 16:15, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ChristianKl: Shouldn’t be too hard to implement as far as I can tell, but it might take a while due to other things being prioritized above it. --Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 17:38, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is the “form” equivalent of item of property constraint (P2305), what about other entity types? Have there been proposals for those, and/or are they needed? Maybe it would be useful to create several at once. (Compare the sandbox properties, where we have one for every data type – though I don’t know if we actually need that many versions of item of property constraint (P2305).) --Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 17:38, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the other entity types needs a "item of property constraint (P2305)". But that is only my thought. -Premeditated (talk) 20:24, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata:WikiProject Properties/Reports/Datatypes has a column with some of the constraints on values. Format and range constraints frequently have similar functions.

For coordinates, the value (0,0) is sometimes added by error. Maybe we could have a none-of constraint (Q52558054) for that.
A one-of constraint (Q21510859) for suggested values could work on die axis (P8751), a quantity-datatype property, with values 12 clock position, 6 clock position, etc.
For Wikibase installations with a more limited scope, values for dates might work with a list of suggested values to pick from.

If the same code would work for all of them, maybe it's worth adding them. --- Jura 09:12, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not done @Premeditated, Jura1, ChristianKl, Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE): Since it's been more than six months since any discussion I'm setting this to "not done". I assume going forward if it seems useful to create such constraint properties this discussion could be considered but I assume the developers don't really need approval for such things anyway? :) ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:30, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]