Poking around and seeing a few things, I think instead a proper model would go something like this (example breadcrumb hierarchy for easier understanding):
P400 platform https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P400 <-- P880 CPU https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P880 <-- ?? ISA <-- P306 operating system https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P306 <-- P1547 depends on software https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1547
but it looks like we merge together the concept of P400 platform with the concept of an ISA (not formalized as a property in Wikidata, but only a Class)
Formal example: DEC Alpha https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q858065 <-- DEC Alpha https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q858065 <-- ?? ISA <-- Tru64 Unix https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q204214 <-- ??
So it seems that P400 platform doesn't define very hard constraints around this:
- Any computer program, software, etc. can be a platform. - A platform must be an instance or subclass of a computing platform.
and probably this was modeled to offer more flexibility, as I see now. I think that makes sense, since historically a "platform" concept has shifted over time.
So I think that my proposal for "depends on hardware" is in fact already done, and just simplified as the existing property P400 platform https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P400 .
So in the end, I think https://schema.org/processorRequirements in Wikidata terms would expect a type of "P400 platform" or even "P880 CPU" The simplest way to model this would be as you said, making https://schema.org/processorRequirements a subproperty of P400 platform https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P400
DONE! [image: image.png]
Thad https://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:18 PM Hay (Husky) huskyr@gmail.com wrote:
Hey Thad, if 'https://schema.org/gamePlatform' is a subproperty of P400 i would definitely say that processerRequirements can be a subproperty too!
-- Hay
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 2:42 AM Thad Guidry thadguidry@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Hay,
It does seem that P400 (platform) is currently being generically used
beyond traditional platforms to say "some kind of hardware or system".
If that is OK and indeed P400 has become elevated and less restrictive,
then I'll gladly use that. It's talk history during proposal seems to lead in many side discussions but without general consensus of less or more restrictive use...but now it's usage over the last 2 years seems much less restrictive.
Would you agree that https://schema.org/processorRequirements could be
considered a subproperty of P400 (platform) ?
Thad https://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 6:40 PM Hay (Husky) huskyr@gmail.com wrote:
Hey Thad, interesting question. Maybe P400 (platform) might work? This is mostly used for things like 'Playstation 4' or 'iOS', but i think processor architecture could be valid there as well.
Kind regards, -- Hay
On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 12:11 AM Thad Guidry thadguidry@gmail.com
wrote:
With application Q166142
I ran into a mapping problem again with Schema.org where we have a
nice Property already called https://schema.org/processorRequirements that allows listing the ISA (instruction set architecture) that some applications are designed for and require in order to run. (This happened a lot historically when the world wasn't limited to a handful of ISA's beyond Intel-based and ARM-based :-) )
Anyways...
As you can see on application Q166142 where I tried to overload
through properties for this type P1963 the use of the existing instruction set P1068 which doesn't quite work, since an application is not a class of electronic circuit or instruction set architecture.
I could not find an appropriate Property already existing in a
predicate form.
Such as "requires ISA" or "requires instruction set" or even better
and more generally "depends on hardware" since we seem to already have a depends on software Property and this could be the reverse to state that some Thing has a hardware dependency or requires some kind of hardware ?
I'd love some help in searching if something like this already
exists, or if that kind of Property was proposed before. (I sincerely tried and dug around for over 2 hours)
I could thus properly map and connect a few more dots to Schema.org's
property and other Linked Open Vocabularies.
Thad https://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/ _______________________________________________ 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
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
