Property talk:P913
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Documentation
notation
mathematical notation or another symbol
mathematical notation or another symbol
Description | mathematical notation or another symbol | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Represents | notation (Q2001982) | |||||||||
Data type | Item | |||||||||
Template parameter | CAN BE MAPPED TO E.G. en:template:Infobox physical quantity: symbols. | |||||||||
Domain | Some categories of MAIN TYPE (physical or mathematical values) (note: this should be moved to the property statements) | |||||||||
Allowed values | Unicode symbol or sequence of symbols (note: this should be moved to the property statements) | |||||||||
Example | equality (Q842346) → equals sign (Q214796) pi (Q167) → pi (Q168) Q.E.D. (Q188722) → tombstone (Q9391599) | |||||||||
Tracking: usage | Category:Pages using Wikidata property P913 (Q43543613) | |||||||||
See also | depicted by (P1299) | |||||||||
Lists |
| |||||||||
Proposal discussion | Proposal discussion | |||||||||
Current uses |
| |||||||||
Search for values |
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
Value type “character (Q3241972), digraph (Q191494)”: This property should use items as value that contain property “instance of (P31), subclass of (P279)”. On these, the value for instance of (P31), subclass of (P279) should be an item that uses subclass of (P279) with value character (Q3241972), digraph (Q191494) (or a subclass thereof). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P913#Value type Q3241972, Q191494, SPARQL
Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P913#Entity types
Scope is as main value (Q54828448): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P913#Scope, SPARQL
Extended types of notations
[edit]I'd like to use this property in a slightly extended scope to refer to encoding systems. For instance
- character (Q32483) → character encoding (Q184759)
- administrative territorial entity of the United States (Q852446) → ISO 3166-2:US (Q28056)
- love (Q316) → heart (Q826930)
- Resource Description Framework (Q54872) → RDF/XML (Q48940)
Allowed values should be subclass or instance of code (Q188889). -- JakobVoss (talk) 13:26, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- @JakobVoss: I see your point and may even agree that the word "notation" primarily refers to an encoding system (or system of symbols) rather than to an individual symbol (see the corresponding notation (Q2001982) Wikidata item), though I understand that "equality in mathematical notation" may be expressed as "the notation for equality" which leads to the word "notation" to be chosen for the property back in 2013, when it was created.
- I disagree however with the suggestion to simply extend the scope of the property, as "symbol" and "notation" are two distinct concepts, where one isn't even a subclass of the other, and automated systems would have trouble telling them apart. Since you made this suggestion and accordingly added a number of claims, constraints have been added resulting in your claims now being marked as having issues, while nobody has commented on it here.
- While renaming notation (P913) to, say symbol (P913) might be an idea, I find that searching Wikidata for "notation" turns up also properties like LilyPond notation (P6883), SMARTS notation (P8533), and Iconclass notation (P1256) (there are several more), and I consider them fine as they are. But then the property notation (P913) stands out as being too unspecific. Maybe it should be spelled out as mathematical notation (P913) instead? That would technically free up the single word "notation" for the purpose you have in mind, although I'm not sure it's a good idea to rename well-established properties and redefine the old names to give them new meaning, nor am I aware of any codified procedure for doing this.
- Would merely introducing a new property system of notation (which may sound a bit repetitive in terms, I know) be sufficient for your purpose? -- SM5POR (talk) 10:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)