Wikidata:Property proposal/has branch
has anatomical branch[edit]
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Natural science
| Description | branches of this blood vessel, lymphatic vessel or nerve |
|---|---|
| Data type | Item |
| Template parameter | "BranchTo" in en:Template:Infobox_artery and en:Template:Infobox nerve, and "DrainsFrom" in en:Template:Infobox vein |
| Domain | anatomical structure |
| Allowed values | anatomical structure (Q4936952) |
| Example | common carotid artery (Q214275) → external carotid artery (Q125276) and internal carotid artery (Q515848) |
| See also | Wikidata:Property proposal/branch of |
- Motivation
There is no property that can describe the relation between a larger vessel and its branches. For example, external carotid artery (Q125276) and internal carotid artery (Q515848) are not the parts of common carotid artery (Q214275). --Okkn (talk) 05:34, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Notified participants of WikiProject Medicine --Okkn (talk) 12:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
- Discussion
Support ChristianKl (talk) 16:20, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
- Is this for rivers also? "Branch" is not only a medial term. For the medical sense of this, the relationship seems reasonable. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
- I didn't think of such a case, but it is quite possible if needed. --Okkn (talk) 15:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
- I also think that the very general wording could cause problems. But I need to think about it for a while. --Tobias1984 (talk) 19:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
- Is this not the inverse of Wikidata:Property_proposal/branch_of? I have been commenting on that page, but I don't know wikidata best practices here Cmungall (talk) 03:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Okkn: have you seen Cmungall's question? Thryduulf (talk) 19:52, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I read. But I have no idea... --Okkn (talk) 15:14, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
- I believe it is. So my question as a wikipedia noob is where should discussion be consolidated? The characteristics of a property often carry over trivially to the the characteristics of its inverse, so it makes no sense to split discussion. Perhaps one direction could be designated as primary? In RO we sometimes auto-populate the inverse (see this ticket), maybe a bot could be used to check metadata on properties are consistent with inverses?
- Yes, I read. But I have no idea... --Okkn (talk) 15:14, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Okkn: have you seen Cmungall's question? Thryduulf (talk) 19:52, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
For rivers we have tributary (P974) and mouth of the watercourse (P403) to express this relationship, so I'm not sure something so generic is required. Thryduulf (talk) 21:05, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- The concept of tributaries can also be applied to veins, as in RO_0002376. When working in OWL, there are advantages to generic properties that share axiomatization, but this may not carry over to Wikidata. In which case, if an anatomical concept of tributary is required, the label "drains blood into" can be used (or something more general to include lymph) Cmungall (talk) 04:58, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I renamed the property label of this proposal in order to specify the range. --Okkn (talk) 17:41, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Okkn, Cmungall, ChristianKl, JakobVoss:
Done together with anatomical branch of (P3261). Please make good use of it.
--- Jura 04:24, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
