I like the "associated peoples" idea - it's more widely applicable than
"culture". I could change my proposal to this, so that it could be used for
all these cases?
If 'dominant culture' needs indicating, I think it would make sense to do
this as a 'qualifier' on the relevant culture (there may not be an
appropriate property for this yet). Similarly, you could specify
'start-date' and 'end-date' qualifiers to indicate when each people was
associated with the site/object/concept.
Lawrence
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 at 13:34 Andrew Gray <andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk> wrote:
"Culture" seems a good idea. I was
considering whether "associated
peoples" might be better than "inhabited by" - with a constraint to
make it clear that values had to be an instance of a nationality,
ethnic group, population, etc., rather than individuals. It seems to
overlap a bit with "culture".
This would let us have "countries" like:
* Aztec empire : associated peoples : Mexica (and others)
* France : associated peoples : French people
but also could be used for both historic & contemporary cultural
concepts/objects/sites/etc:
* Armenian dance : associated peoples : Armenian people
* Sutton Hoo : associated peoples : Anglo-Saxons
* Highland dress : associated peoples : Scottish people
Unlike the culture idea, it wouldn't be implicitly "dominant culture".
This may or many not be a good thing :-)
Andrew.
On 14 January 2016 at 10:48, Lawrence Troup <lawrencetroup(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi James,
This is quite similar to my proposal for a "culture" property [1], which
would be used e.g. for Tenochtitlan [Q13695] has "culture" Mexica
[Q3307681]
(and probably also has culture Aztec [Q12542]).
You could potentially
extend
the usage of this attribute so that you could
have the "culture" of the
Aztec Empire set to Mexica.
I agree with Andrew that "inhabited by" is a property that needs adding -
though in this case, it wouldn't indicate that Mexica were rulers of the
Aztec Empire, just that they lived in it.
Thanks,
Lawrence
[1] "culture" property proposal:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Creative_work#cult…
On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 at 09:49 Andrew Gray <andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk>
wrote:
>
> Hi James,
>
> Interesting question, this one. There's no easy way to link, eg,
> "France" and "French people".
>
> We have a property for "category of associated people" (P1792), so:
> France [P1792] Category:French people; & in turn that has a
> "category's main topic": Category:French people [P301] French people -
> but this is very convoluted!
>
> I wonder if this might be something looking for a suitable new
> property - "inhabited by"? "associated nationality"?.
Alternatively,
> we could use P17, "country", on the item for the population group -
> this is a bit generic, but it would work.
>
> Andrew.
>
> On 13 January 2016 at 18:58, <james(a)j1w.xyz> wrote:
> > I want to add relationships between Mexica :Q3307681and Aztec Empire
> > :Q794210 [1] where Mexicas were an indigenous people of the Valley of
> > Mexico, known today as the rulers of the Aztec empire. I haven't
found
any properties that seem appropriate to me so I'd
like to get your
insight before adding any. What properties would be most appropriate?
[1] ConceptMap link:
http://bit.ly/1RMVgsD
Regards,
James Weaver
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata