One other issue to bear in mind: it's *simple* to have properties as a separate thing. I have been following this discussion with some interest but... well, I don't think I'm particularly stupid, but most of it is completely above my head.
Saying "here are items, here are a set of properties you can define relating to them, here's some notes on how to use properties" is going to get a lot more people able to contribute than if they need to start understanding theoretical aspects of semantic relationships... ;-) Andrew. On 28 May 2014 09:37, Daniel Kinzler <daniel.kinz...@wikimedia.de> wrote: > Key differences between Properties and Items: > > * Properties have a data type, items don't. > * Items have sitelinks, Properties don't. > * Items have Statements, Properties will support Claims (without sources). > > The software needs these constraints/guarantees to be able to take shortcuts, > provide specialized UI and API functionality, etc. > > Yes, it would be possible to use items as properties instead of having a > separate entity type. But they are structurally and functionally different, so > it makes sense to have a strict separate. This makes a lot of things easier, > e.g.: > > * setting different permissions for properties > * mapping to rdf vocabularies > > More fundamentally, they are semantically different: an item describes a > concept > in "the real world", while a property is a structural component used for such > a > description. > > Yes, properies are simmilar to data items, and in some cases, there may be an > item representing the same concept that is represented by a property entity. I > don't see why that is a problem, while I can see a lot of confusion arising > from > mixing them. > > -- daniel > > > Am 28.05.2014 09:25, schrieb David Cuenca: >> Since the very beginning I have kept myself busy with properties, thinking >> about >> which ones fit, which ones are missing to better describe reality, how >> integrate >> into the ones that we have. The thing is that the more I work with them, the >> less difference I see with normal items.... and if soon there will be >> statements >> allowed in property pages, the difference will blur even more. >> I can understand that from the software development point of view it might >> make >> sense to have a clear difference. Or for the community to get a deeper >> understanding of the underlying concepts represented by words. >> >> But semantically I see no difference between: >> cement (Q45190) <emissivity (P1295)> 0.54 >> and >> cement (Q45190) <emissivity (Q899670)> 0.54 >> >> Am I missing something here? Are properties really needed or are we adding >> unnecessary artificial constraints? >> >> Cheers, >> Micru >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikidata-l mailing list >> Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l >> > > > -- > Daniel Kinzler > Senior Software Developer > > Wikimedia Deutschland > Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata-l mailing list > Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l