Property talk:P1190
Documentation
library classification of this topic
((["(*+:=`-]|\(=|:{1,2})?[0-9]{1,3}(\.[0-9]{1,3})*[")]?)+
”: value must be formatted using this pattern (PCRE syntax). (Help)List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1190#Format, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1190#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1190#Scope, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1190#Conflicts with P31, SPARQL
This property is being used by: Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
Missing information[edit]
The property documentation is incomplete: infobox parameter and source are missing. What library catalogs are using this classification? --Kolja21 (talk) 18:44, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- Done I've added the missing information to the property documentation. --Kolja21 (talk) 12:38, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Usage of the property[edit]
I think the property has a problem of its definition: It is used both on works (e.g. Diccionario geográfico-estadístico-histórico de España y sus posesiones de Ultramar (Q3822320)Universal Decimal Classification (P1190)'908(460)(038)'; cf. also Universal Decimal Classification (P1190)instance of (P31)Wikidata property for authority control for works (Q19833377), which is IMHO wrong, UDC does not specify an authority identifier of the work, only the categorization of its subject topic), and on topics (e.g. politics (Q7163)Universal Decimal Classification (P1190)'32'). Shouldn’t we split these two usages, possibly making the second one an authority identifier? OTOH, Dewey Decimal Classification (P1036) is defined the same way and has the same problems… --Mormegil (talk) 09:19, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Mormegil: Yes I just noticed the same thing. I agree we should split these two usages. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:34, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
- Apparently, there was a big discussion and multi-property proposal concerning this exact topic without anyone participating feeling the need to note this on talkpages of the relevant properties, especially where this discussion was already taking place. Oh dear. See Wikidata:Property proposal/Library classifications' IDs for topics and the newly created Universal Decimal Classification (works and editions) (P8361) and others. --Mormegil (talk) 10:00, 19 July 2023 (UTC)