| thiemowmde added a comment. |
Sorry but that's not good enough. 50k is a significant amount. This will and should grow. And we have the API that also needs to handle this.
@Lydia_Pintscher, I find this sentence not sufficient. What will "grow"?
Are you sure you got the "50k" right? There are only 50k deprecated statements in total. How many of these are involved in a constraint violation? A few hundred, maybe? And how many of these reports are semantically correct and worth fixing? A few dozen, maybe?
We discussed this in a big round on Tuesday and figured, as a group, this is just not worth the effort. At least not right now. We decided to not show any constrain reports on statements that are deprecated anyway, but not remove these reports from the API yet. If it turns out a specific type of constraint is really valuable even on deprecated statements, it can quite easily be re-enabled later.
The suggestion made in T167653#3406413 is perfectly fine, but means we are going to spend a lot more time on this right now.
Cc: Esc3300, thiemowmde, Pigsonthewing, Lydia_Pintscher, Ivan_A_Krestinin, Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Nikki, Aklapper, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, Izno, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Mbch331
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list Wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
