On the other hand the users, especially on some specific domains, are probably the one who knows how the uncertainty data are used and represented in their field and could give good inputs of what they would need, both on the UI and on the technical side. With discussion on a project tracker we may have a big bias on computer-tecchi members on the community.

2015-09-21 12:40 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kinzler <daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de>:

Am 21.09.2015 um 12:08 schrieb Andy Mabbett:
> Focussing such a discussion in Phabricator is a bad thing
> .
> To my mind, discussion of how Wikdiata represents statements should be
> conducted on Wikidata; Phabricator should be used for discussion of
> how, in coding terms, to enact the consensus at Wikidata.

As long as we can agree on one place, it's fine with me. I was pointing to
Phabricator because the discussion about deriving uncertainty intervals from the
dignificant digits of decimal notation has been going on there for some weeks
and months already.

Also, the issue does seem rather technical to me. It's a question of how to
interpret the decimal (and scientific) notation of measured quantities when
parsing user input.

--
Daniel Kinzler
Senior Software Developer

Wikimedia Deutschland
Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.

_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata