The idea was readability and internationalization.
This is achievable by keeping as a comment the label or alias the user used in the first place. I think for intl it's better to be able to share templates beetween projects ;)
2015-07-08 22:00 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de:
Am 08.07.2015 um 18:45 schrieb Thomas Douillard:
2015-07-08 17:34 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kinzler <daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de mailto:daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de>: I think it might be possible, but not easy, and potentially very
confusing. Why
would you prefer that solution?Because of the property renaming problem. If unfortunately a property is
renamed
and someone used the label in a parser function call, then this might
break
templates.
Not if the old name is kept as an alias. Which seems the easier and more streight forward solution to me.
This might happen if a property is split, and we don't keep the alias on both resulting properties of the splitting because of the uniqueness
of
aliases constraint.
Splitting will always be a problem. Some usages will end up having the wrong P-id or name or label or alias or whatever.
Of course if the property is split there might need more drastic changes
in the
clients and templates, but relying on labels for stability when we have
stable
Pids to rely on seems like a half-baked solution to me. Especially when
renaming
is so easy in the UI.
The idea was readability and internationalization.
If there is consensus to not use human readable property names for accessing data, and solely rely on IDs instead, we could indeed stop all this right now, and just drop the uniqueness constraint for labels as well as for aliases of properties.
You are right that changing the name of a property shouldn't be as easy as it currently is. There should at least be a warning.
-- 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