Wikidata

Wikidata:Property proposal/action applies to

< Wikidata:Property proposal
(Redirected from Wikidata:Property proposal/object pertains to)

action applies to edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

   Not done
Descriptionqualifier to be used when the object of a statement is an action, to qualify what the action applies to
Data typeItem
Domainitems that are subclasses of occurrence (Q1190554)
Example 1film editing (Q237893)subclass of (P279)editing (Q194105)action applies tofilm (Q11424)
Example 2text editor (Q131212)has use (P366)editing (Q194105)action applies toplain text (Q1145976)
Example 3rmdir (Q218127)has use (P366)deletion (Q18411409)action applies toempty directory (Q115092120)
Example 4HTTP client (Q2979024)has use (P366)sending (Q115088683)action applies toHTTP request (Q4344724)
Example 5thermal insulation (Q918306)has goal (P3712)reduction (Q47496130)action applies toheat transfer (Q179635)
Example 6fall protection (Q23580296)has goal (P3712)prevention (Q1717246)action applies tofalling (Q333495)
See alsoof (P642), ?item wdt:instance of (P31) wd:Wikidata qualifier to describe the object of a statement (Q115396176)

Motivation edit

We want to deprecate the overused and ambiguous of (P642) and this property can replace of (P642) for the described purpose.

The property is specifically meant for objects that describe some activity and are labeled after some verb, e.g:

  • editing -> to edit sth. -> sth. can be qualified with "action applies to"
  • deletion -> to delete sth. -> sth. can be qualified with "action applies to"
  • sending -> to send sth. -> sth. can be qualified with "action applies to"
  • reduction -> to reduce sth. -> sth. can be qualified with "action applies to"
  • prevention -> to prevent sth. -> sth. can be qualified with "action applies to"
  • etc.

The proposed qualifier would be an instance of (P31)restrictive qualifier (Q61719275).

--Push-f (talk) 07:52, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @Push-f: Let's avoid repeating each other's work: The whole of Wikidata:WikiProject Data Quality/Issues/P642 is already set up to track the uses and proposed replacements, and in fact, there was already an entry that matches this proposal (see the section Wikidata:WikiProject_Data_Quality/Issues/P642#Qualifying_any_property): "item to which action applies", aliases "object of action"; "target of action"; "patient". That label and those aliases inherently convey that the domain is restricted to occurrences, which "object pertains to" does not. If those more specific label/aliases are used instead, I can support this proposal. Note, though, per the table, that there are statements whose object is an occurrence for which another qualifier is better suited (namely, criterion used (P1013) when the qualifier value is a quality or the like, and applies to part (P518) when the qualifier value is part of the subject item), and any auto migration to this new property should take care to treat those statements accordingly. Swpb (talk) 21:21, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We can work on making the tables easier to read. I do wish you had asked for clarification of them before you started a proposal discussion, but I think we're on roughly the same page now. I agree "action applies to" is better.
As for the cases where other properties may be better, I'll take the first example straight from the table:
  1. playing (Q110458661)has goal (P3712)improvement (Q21255975)criterion used (P1013)game position (Q98695319)
I'll have to work on finding a good example of the other case when I have a chance; I have to go offline now. Swpb (talk) 21:14, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Push-f: For the second case, I realized while working on the query that applies to part (P518) is the best replacement for of (P642) whenever the qualifier value is part of the subject item, not just when the statement value is an occurrence. Lots of examples of that in this query. I've expanded the use case on Wikidata:WikiProject Data Quality/Issues/P642 accordingly. Swpb (talk) 19:26, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Example 1: "action applies to" should be a main statement rather than a qualifier. Example 2: text editors like VSCode can edit other file types other than plain text. Plain text also seems to be heavily conflated at the moment in this regard too. Lectrician1 (talk) 01:44, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see the problem with qualifying subclass of (P279) with a clearly defined qualifier such as "action applies to". Is there some reasoning behind this "don't qualify P279" mindset?
has use (P366) is described as "main use of the subject" ... and the main use of a text editor is the editing of plain text. Stating a "main use" does not imply that there cannot be other uses. Sidenote: "main use" does not even have a single-value or best-value constraint so there can also be multiple main uses and indeed many items specify multiple. So I consider Visual Studio Code (Q19841877)has use (P366)editing (Q194105)action applies toplain text (Q1145976) to be a true statement because even if VS code can edit non-plain-text files its main use cases certainly is the editing of plain text files. Also note that even Vim (Q131382) allows the editing of binary files with -b.
--Push-f (talk) 03:48, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see the problem with qualifying subclass of (P279) with a clearly defined qualifier such as "action applies to". Is there some reasoning behind this "don't qualify P279" mindset?
The action you're describing is the film editing itself. It makes sense to relate the action and whatever it applies to directly and not through a qualifier. If you use a qualifier it makes it seem as if "editing" always and only applies to "film". Lectrician1 (talk) 04:24, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
has use (P366) is described as "main use of the subject" ... and the main use of a text editor is the editing of plain text. Stating a "main use" does not imply that there cannot be other uses. Sidenote: "main use" does not even have a single-value or best-value constraint so there can also be multiple main uses and indeed many items specify multiple. So I consider Visual Studio Code (Q19841877)has use (P366)editing (Q194105)action applies toplain text (Q1145976) to be a true statement because even if VS code can edit non-plain-text files its main use cases certainly is the editing of plain text files. Also note that even Vim (Q131382) allows the editing of binary files with -b.
Makes sense. Lectrician1 (talk) 04:26, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The action you're describing is the film editing itself.

No, certainly not. "film editing" is subclass of the "editing" action that only applies the action to "film". Makes perfect sense to me.

If you use a qualifier it makes it seem as if "editing" always and only applies to "film".

Yes but that is very much the case for "film editing" that the "editing" only applies to "film".
--Push-f (talk) 07:19, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree with "If you use a qualifier it makes it seem as if "editing" always and only applies to "film"." The full statement is saying (unambiguously, IMO) that in the context of film editing specifically, the editing is done to film. Which allows for infinite other contexts, where editing is done to things other than film. "Action applies to" should definitely not be a main statement; that would open it to all sorts of ambiguous uses. Swpb (talk) 16:59, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Swpb
"Action applies to" should definitely not be a main statement; that would open it to all sorts of ambiguous uses.
Like what? Lectrician1 (talk) 18:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pick any activity you like: does travel (Q61509) "apply to" a traveler, a starting point, a destination, etc.? And in what way does it apply to each? Allowing this as a main statement property invites all sorts of "creative" uses that will be impossible to systematize. It works as a qualifier precisely because the parent statement provides context - there is no wondering what is meant by each of the example statements above. Swpb (talk) 19:01, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Example 3:

rmdir (Q218127) has use (P366)deletion (Q18411409) action applies to empty directory (Q115092120)

Deletion of empty directory where? Another computer? How does it know the context of where? This action needs to be modeled with a more complex data model that explicitly defines what is going on here in an operating system. Lectrician1 (talk) 04:30, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Any computer operation that applies to a computer file can be assumed to refer to a local file unless otherwise qualified. Because 99% of all command-line tools operate on local files and we certainly don't want to force all of these statements to be needlessly qualified.
You do raise a very good point however: how do we model the difference between cp (Q305946) and scp (Q115516614)?
I just created the source of action & destination of action proposal to address that.
--Push-f (talk) 09:19, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Examples 5 and 6 are not actions. Lectrician1 (talk) 18:21, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The scope is occurrence (Q1190554), not action, and both are occurrences through a chain of subclass of (P279) statements. Swpb (talk) 19:03, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Push-f @Swpb @JAn Dudík @ChristianKl just going to point out that Wikidata:Property proposal/object of action provides a more-specific property for examples 1-3. Additionally I find this property extremely concerning because the different type of relationship examples 1-3 are making compared to 4-6. 1-3 are making an action -> object relation whereas 4 is making an object -> object relation, and 5 and 6 are making an object -> action relationship. If we have inconsistent relationships like this, this property could be used in out-of-control ways like of (P642) is currently used. Furthermore, we have no constraints to prevent "incorrect" uses either. Please consider opposing for these reasons. Lectrician1 (talk) 17:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Property_proposal/action_applies_to&oldid=2061533657"