Wikidata:Property proposal/supplements

supplement to

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

   Done: supplement to (P9234) (Talk and documentation)

Description	subject work or edition updates or otherwise complements the object work or edition
Data type	Item
Domain	item
Allowed values	Q numbers
Example 1	ROF intermediation tool for RDA (Q104554701) is supplement to ROF intermediation tool (Q104538499)
Example 2	ROF storage medium format for RDA (Q104554763) is supplement to ROF storage medium format (Q104538540)
Example 3	Greek Ethnic Terminology (Q104556340) is supplement to A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names (Q104555561)
Example 4	The Foreign Residents of Athens: an Annex to the Lexicon of Greek Personal Names: Attica (Q104556625) is supplement to A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names (Q104555561)
Example 5	God and the Bible (Q42190481) is supplement to Literature and Dogma (Q19100181)
Example 6	Journal of Cell Science. Supplement (Q27711422) is supplement to Journal of Cell Science (Q1524177)
Example 7	Supplement to the Dictionary of American Library Biography (Q31804130) is supplement to Dictionary of American Library Biography (Q31790728)
Planned use	linking RDA/ONIX framework vocabularies to their supplementary vocabularies for RDA, but will have much broader use to link supplementary works and editions to the works/editions that they update or complement
Expected completeness	always incomplete (Q21873886)

Motivation

There is currently no good way in Wikidata to state that one work is a supplement to another work. RDA has the relationship element "supplement to work" (alias "is supplement to work") to relate a supplement to a the work that it supplements: http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/w/P10154. Having a property to link a supplementary work to the work it supplements will be a useful addition to Wikidata descriptions of works. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 23:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

 Support Moebeus (talk) 12:26, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Question Would that then become a super-property of expansion of (P8646)? (the paper Relationships among video games: Existing standards and new definitions (Q50180192) [from which I drew heavily for P8646] does map it to RDA’s “complemented by/complement of and supplement to/ supplement”. Jean-Fred (talk) 16:12, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

  The description of expansion of (P8646) is "expansion pack of a game (video game, tabletop or board game)". That does not seem to be a narrower concept to me, but perhaps it is. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 04:28, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

  Can you then define what is meant by “supplement”? (I imagine it is well-defined term within your field, but I’m not knowledgeable about it :) Jean-Fred (talk) 13:38, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

  This is the definition from the Online Dictionary of Library and Information Science: Additional matter, more extensive than an addendum, issued under separate cover and title page, in serial or monographic form, for the stated purpose of complementing a previously published work, usually to clarify, continue, expand, or update it or to add a special feature (maps, statistics, directory information, etc.). RDA defines "is supplement to work" as "Relates a work to a work that is updated or otherwise complemented by an augmenting work." UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 22:28, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

  Thanks! Do I understand correctly from this definition (and the examples given above) that besides the controlled vocabularies, this property would only apply to written work (Q47461344)? Ie, it would not make sense for musical works, movies (or indeed, video games)? Or does it apply to any kind of work (Q386724) (and if so, can we find more examples)? The 'domain' in the proposal above should be updated accordingly. Jean-Fred (talk) 12:53, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

• I think I would to copy the RDA name "supplement to work" over the more general "supplement to" unless there are good arguments for why we want the less specific name.

ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:50, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

RDA also has "is supplement to expression", defined as "Relates an expression to an expression of a work that is updated or otherwise complemented by an augmenting expression." The proposal "supplement to" in Wikidata could be used at both the work and edition levels. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 22:28, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

• Strong  Support with the simple label "supplement to". I'd avoid the RDA labels and definitions, they're just a bagunça. Thanks, Prburley (talk)

 Support I would apply this to any kind of work (Q386724) and would consider an expansion pack of a game a narrower concept. There is a need to be very specific about the domain here, since the entities representing work (Q386724) in the semantic web are so numerous, and modeled in so many ways. Can we define this as applicable to works and expressions as defined in the LRM/FRBR? The representation of these ideas in Wikidata is reflective of the general inconsistencies we see across other data models so the domain here is hard to define. --Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 21:43, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

 Support Pteropotamus (talk) 10:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

 Support zidmgmt (talk) 11:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

 Support, agreeing with Prburley comment above. Uncommon fritillary (talk) 15:31, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Support, also agreeing with Prburley above. Nashona (talk) 18:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• @UWashPrincipalCataloger, Moebeus, Prburley, Clements.UWLib, Zidmgmt, Uncommon fritillary: and @Nashona:  Done --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 22:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)