Personally I would prefer a mixed approach, where there is a list of top-level items that are authorized, and then verifying that the item used is a subclass of any of those items. Whether those constraints are hard-enforced or just supervised could be a topic of discussion, but IMHO the more automated, the better.
Regarding the codes, it can be generated with the code of the top-level item+the Q number of the item used. If someone wants to use one or the other, it should be quite easy to remove. Cheers, David On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Denny Vrandečić <vrande...@gmail.com> wrote: > The current spec of the data model states that an L-Item has a lemma, a > language, and several forms, and the forms in turn have representations. > > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:WikibaseLexeme/Data_Model > > The language is a Q-Item, the lemma and the representations are > Multilingual Texts. Multilingual texts are sets of pairs of strings and > UserLanguageCodes. > > My question is about the relation between representing a language as a > Q-Item and as a UserLanguageCode. > > A previous proposal treated lemmas and representations as raw strings, > with the language pointing to the Q-Item being the only language > information. This now is gone, and the lemma and representation carry their > own language information. > > How do they interact? The language set referencable through Q-Items is > much larger than the set of languages with a UserLanguageCode, and indeed, > the intention was to allow for every language to be representable in > Wikidata, not only those with a UserLanguageCode. > > I sense quite a problem here. > > I see two possible ways to resolve this: > - return to the original model and use strings instead of Multilingual > texts (with all the negative implications for variants) > - use Q-Items instead of UserLanguageCodes for Multilingual texts (which > would be quite a migration) > > I don't think restricting Wiktionary4Wikidata support to the list of > languages with a UserLanguageCode is a viable solution, which would happen > if we implement the data model as currently suggested, if I understand it > correctly. > > Cheers, > Denny > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata > > -- Etiamsi omnes, ego non
_______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
