Just do them all, as fast as the bot can go.
Revert them /if/ somebody complains (which is unlikely).
Make this a process of having to contract out for an identifier /not/ to
be done, rather than having to contract in for it to be done.
Personally, I am rather more interested in what happens next, after the
datatype-renaming stage is done.
How does the external-ID datatype then evolve?
How does it cope with a external ID possibly having a short-form
representation, a URL for humans (currently specified by P1630 for the
group as a whole), a URL for RDF (currently specified by P1921 for the
group as a whole), also sometimes a locally preferred name, or a locally
disambiguated name in the external source.
What becomes its wdt: value for SPARQL?
What other object-values will get hung off its detailed statement form ?
What will specified using qualifiers?
Some more clarifications of current forward thinking on this might also
help with people's concerns about how to respond to departures from
strict 1-to-1-ness in the mappings (whether many-to-one or one-to-many).
-- James.
On 05/03/2016 16:15, Markus Krötzsch wrote:
Hi,
I agree with Egon that the uniqueness requirement is rather weird. What
it means is that a thing is only considered an "identifier" if it points
to a database that uses a similar granularity for modelling the world as
Wikidata. If the external database is more fine-grained than Wikidata
(several ids for one item), then it is not a valid "identifier",
according to the uniqueness idea. I wonder what good this may do. In
particular, anybody who cares about uniqueness can easily determine it
from the data without any property type that says this.
Markus
On 05.03.2016 15:35, Egon Willighagen wrote:
On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Lydia Pintscher
<lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 3:17 PM Egon Willighagen
<egon.willigha...@gmail.com>
What is the exact process? Do you just plan to wait longer to see if
anyone supports/contradicts my tagging? Should I get other Wikidata
users and contributors to back up my suggestion?
Add them to the list Katie linked if you think they should be
converted. We
wait a bit to see if anyone disagrees and I also do a quick sanity
check for
each property myself before conversion.
I am adding comments for now. I am also looking at the comments for
what it takes to be "identifier":
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Addshore/Identifiers#Characteristics_of_external_identifiers
What is the resolution in these? There are some strong, often
contradiction, opinions...
For example, the uniqueness requirement is interesting... if an
identifier must be unique for a single Wikidata entry, this is
effectively disqualifying most identifiers used in the life
sciences... simply because Wikidata rarely has the exact same concept
in Wikidata as it has in the remote database.
I'm sure we can give examples from any life science field, but
consider a gene: the concept of a gene in Wikidata is not like a gene
sequence in a DNA sequence database. Hence, an identifier from that
database could not be linked as "identifier" to that Wikidata entry.
Same for most identifiers for small organic compounds (like drugs,
metabolites, etc). I already commented on CAS (P231) and InChI (P234),
both are used as identifier, but none are unique to concepts used as
"types" in Wikidata. The CAS for formaldehyde and formaline is
identical. The InChI may be unique, but only of you strongly type the
definition of a chemical graph instead of a substance (as is now)...
etc.
So, in order to make a decision which chemical identifiers should be
marked as "identifier" type depends on resolution of those required
characteristics...
Can you please inform me about the state of those characteristics
(accepted or declined)?
Egon
Cheers
Lydia
--
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
Product Manager for Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24
10963 Berlin
www.wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
unter
der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
