The talk is not about JSON, I never mentioned it. JSON is a serialization
format and it does not have to be "nice". The talk about the ability to do
something.
As for use case, I have already described it: representing data in the same
(familiar to user) layout as on Wikidata page. If you consider this use
case unimportant or uncommon — well, OK then. At least I tried.
Best regard,
Vlad
2017-11-29 21:28 GMT+03:00 Thiemo Kreuz <thiemo.kreuz(a)wikimedia.de>de>:
[…] it turns
out it lacks PLENTY of properties we usually work with.
From 1400+ properties we
normally use, there are only 480 on this page
This is intended. The list was originally created with the most common
properties, and can and should be expanded any time when the need to do so
arises. Unlisted properties will be moved to the end, in their original
order (as stored in the database). If you find specific properties that
should move up to one of the groups currently specified in
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Wikibase-SortedProperties , go
ahead and suggest changes on the talk page.
As for the suggestions in your other mail: Even if I can understand that a
more "nice" JSON would be – well – more "nice", I don't see what
the
specific benefit of that would be. As long as no specific use case arises I
don't see a reason to invest resources in changing the current behavior.
Best
Thiemo
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-tech mailing list
Wikidata-tech(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-tech