Hoi, You do not get it. There are many properties. Consequently the scale of things is substantially different. It has been demonstrated that languages will have homonyms and consequently it is NOT a good idea to use labels or whatever you call them for properties. You can use them as long as internally you use the P-number. You can use a text as long as the combination of label and description is unique. This combination may be useful.
At the same time be aware that property labels will be wrong and will need to be changed at a later date. When this presents a problem for the comparison with external sources, it is tough. It is best to indicate this from the start.
The argument about what happens in MediaWiki is secondary. And sorry that not everyone cares or knows about that in your way. The point is very much that at the scale of thousands and thousands of properties it does not scale. This point has been made plenty of times by now. Thanks, GerardM
On 12 July 2015 at 15:08, Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de wrote:
Am 12.07.2015 um 12:52 schrieb Gerard Meijssen:
Hoi, Sorry but this reaction is beneath you.
Sorry for the annoyed tone. But I'm quite serious about the questions I asked.
We localize magic words, namespaces, and template names. These are not visible to users, the localization is done for conveniance of people editing wikitext. So why should we not do the same with property names? What's the difference?
And, if that localization gets in the way of portability as you argue, and is not relevant to the people who use these features, why don't we get rid of them?
I do think that allowing access via (optionaly!) localized names is useful. But if it's not wanted/needed, it's fine with me, it would save me quite a bit of work. But I think that we should be consistent about it.
-- 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