editors
3,524
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 15:
Line 15: − + + + + +
no edit summary
* Snak = Property + Value (where value could be an Item, Property, text or something else).
* Snak = Property + Value (where value could be an Item, Property, text or something else).
* A snak directly upon an Item could be considered a property of that Item (a 'property snak', let's say)
* A snak directly upon an Item could be considered a property of that Item (a 'property snak', let's say)
* A qualifier would be a snak applied to a 'property snak'. A property snak of an Item property.
* A qualifier would be a snak applied to a 'property snak'. A snak of an Item property.
Is this right? [[User:Alexbfree|Alexbfree]] ([[User talk:Alexbfree|talk]]) 17:00, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
Is this right? [[User:Alexbfree|Alexbfree]] ([[User talk:Alexbfree|talk]]) 17:00, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
== comments related to querying/graphing and the ultimate merging into a common model ==
{{reply_to|Podehaye}} I was just thinking about this some more. The ability to list and graph usages/related concepts is very powerful. I think something we could do soon is generate a query that lists all the objects of {{P|10}} snaks on ALL instances of {{Q|96}}. If possible gathering both the direct object text of those {{P|10}} properties - but also the {{P|27}} object text of all {{P|10}} properties as well. With this list, once Merge is fixed (maybe it already is?) we should be able to do some serious merging of related concepts (though we should be careful to add {{P|27}} qualifiers where they are absent so that no generated GDPR letter gets its output changed by the merging... [[User:Alexbfree|Alexbfree]] ([[User talk:Alexbfree|talk]]) 17:05, 11 February 2020 (UTC)