Wikidata:Property proposal/quality for this class

quality for this type

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

On hold

Description	MISSING
Data type	Item
Domain	item
Example 1	Numerical Method for Odequality for this classA-Stable
Example 2	MISSING
Example 3	MISSING
Planned use	Disentangle the current conflation of meanings for "has quality"
See also	has characteristic (P1552), properties for this type (P1963), inappropriate property for this type (P8952)
Distinct-values constraint	no

Motivation

Currently, the property has characteristic (P1552) has several usages (in practice, perhaps not by design):

on a class to mark that a particular quality applies to some of its subclasses or instances.
on an instance that has a particular quality.
on a subclass to indicate that every instance has a particular quality.

The first usage is different than the second and third, so conflating them all together is undesirable.

There are qualities that take several different values, for instance gender (Q48277) has values, male, female, etc. Conversly, some "qualities" have only one value. For instance, a particular Runge-Kutta method could be "A-Stable" or not. I'm going to call such properties "attributes." So, we have the following types of relationships:

Human -> gender (all instances of humans have a quality "gender" that takes various values, "male", "female", etc.0
Human -> male, female, etc (
Runge-Kutta method -> A-stable (some instances have the attribute "A-stable")
Backward Euler method -> A-stable (this attribute has the attribute "A-stable")

We could model attributes using the class hierarchy by creating a class for "A-stable method," but I don't like this method (why? expand)

human (Q5)has characteristic (P1552)gender (Q48277)

I propose creating this property using the following modeling. On human (Q5), to model that "gender" is a quality of humans and takes

"class has quality"

gender

edit

Common values (or some other qualifier TBD)	male
	female
	other

0 references

add reference

add value

— The Erinaceous One 🦔 10:12, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

@The-erinaceous-one: your examples currently don't have Q-numbers for items and thus it's hard to follow them. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 20:59, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @ChristianKl: I'm still drafting the proposal 😊 — The Erinaceous One 🦔 22:46, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Then I set it onhold while it's still getting drafted. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:54, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - Okay, thanks! — The Erinaceous One 🦔 06:35, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]