Property talk:P10254

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Documentation

associated cadastral district
cadastral district in which a place is located or is part of. Use only if distinct from administrative entities (P131) in predefined countries
Representscadastral municipality (Q253326)
Data typeItem
ExampleFurrach (Q109807015) → Erlsberg (Q109839531)
Ilgenberg (Q109807035) → Erlsberg (Q109839531)
Adamov (Q351689) → Adamov u Českých Budějovic (Q110166004)
See alsolocated in the administrative territorial entity (P131), school district (P5353), located in the ecclesiastical territorial entity (P5607), associated electoral district (P7938), located in statistical territorial entity (P8138)
Lists
Proposal discussionProposal discussion
Current uses
Total123,594
Main statement123,590>99.9% of uses
Qualifier3<0.1% of uses
Reference1<0.1% of uses
Search for values
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P10254#Value type Q17376095, Q20871353, Q3327862, Q23925382, Q15623950, Q23925393, hourly updated report, SPARQL
Property “country (P17): Austria (Q40), Czech Republic (Q213), Morocco (Q1028)” declared by target items of “associated cadastral district (P10254)”: If [item A] has this property with value [item B], [item B] is required to have property “country (P17): Austria (Q40), Czech Republic (Q213), Morocco (Q1028)”. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P10254#Target required claim P17, SPARQL
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P10254#Item P131, search, SPARQL
Property “located in the administrative territorial entity (P131)” declared by target items of “associated cadastral district (P10254)”: If [item A] has this property with value [item B], [item B] is required to have property “located in the administrative territorial entity (P131)”. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P10254#Target required claim P131, SPARQL, SPARQL (by value)
Item “coordinate location (P625)”: Items with this property should also have “coordinate location (P625)”. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P10254#Item P625, SPARQL
Property “coordinate location (P625)” declared by target items of “associated cadastral district (P10254)”: If [item A] has this property with value [item B], [item B] is required to have property “coordinate location (P625)”. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P10254#Target required claim P625, SPARQL, SPARQL (by value)
Scope is as main value (Q54828448): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P10254#Scope, hourly updated report, SPARQL
Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P10254#Entity types, hourly updated report
Conflicts with “instance of (P31): human (Q5)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P10254#Conflicts with P31, search, SPARQL

Use for Czech Republic (Q213)[edit]

As mentioned in the proposal discussion, this may be useful for other countries, e.g. Czech Republic (Q213).

If you want to use for Czech Republic (Q213), please add the country to the "item requires"-constraint.

Before adding further values, please ensure that for these countries it wont duplicate located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) or another property.

@JAn_Dudík: --- Jura 14:47, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adapting for other countries would require
--UV (talk) 20:31, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jura1, UV, Vojtěch Dostál, Ben Skála: Because of constraints probably will be better to create new property specific for czech catastral areas. JAn Dudík (talk) 07:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Jura1@UV@JAn Dudík I would not mind broadening the scope of the existing property. Constraint can be changed. Or do Austrians need these constraints there? Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 07:48, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The main constraints should avoid that it gets used for countries/regions where P131 is being used. If there is a consensus to use it for a layer in a country, they can easily be adapted.
Other constraints just help achieve completeness. --- Jura 09:29, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
When I look to constraints: P17 should be Q40 or Q213. And item should have cadastral municipality ID in Austria (P8322) for Q40 or Czech cadastral area ID (P7526) for Q213. The rest is same. JAn Dudík (talk) 14:35, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Mis)use for Austria?[edit]

Hi, see Wikidata:Forum#Gemeinde_liegt_in_den_KGs? for the initial discussion. In short:

As an example see Reinsberg (Q672058) (a municipality of Austria (Q667509)) and many other municipalities mostly in Lower Austria, where the municipality lies inside (associated cadastral district (P10254)) a cadastral community (cadastral municipality of Austria (Q17376095), possibly many of them) instead of the other way round, where a cadastral community is part of the municipality (which is the case in Austria):

In Austria cadastral communities are part of municipalities, thus the right relation would be

On the other hand it is perfectly sound to add (punctiform) objects (like a wayside cross (Q2309609), house (Q3947), statue (Q179700), chapel (Q108325) or war memorial (Q575759)) to a specific cadastral community via this property (as done in the Czech Republic).

There is a non-congruent description of associated cadastral district (P10254):

  • en: associated cadastral district
  • de: liegt in der Katastralgemeinde (=lies inside a cadastral district)

how to solve:

  1. we could use contains the administrative territorial entity (P150) instead and located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) as the inverse relation (although the usage of cadastral communities as administrative entities is also disputed and objects are tending to be assigned via located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) to municipalities instead, for practical reasons and because a cadastral community does not perform any administrative tasks on its own):
    this will maintain the container character of a municipality with respect to its cadastral communities.
  2. we should change the label and description of associated cadastral district (P10254) for de and cs. The English description cadastral district in which a place is located or is part of is for places (?) that are part of a cadastral district, while the German Katastralgemeinde, in der ein Ort liegt oder die sich innerhalb einer politischen Gemeinde befindet. translates to cadastral district in which a place is located or which is part of a political municipality says something different. While in the English description the object under consideration lies inside a cadastral district (is part of), the German description tells us, that the object, which is a cadastral district, is part of a municipality (it is not about the object under consideration, but about the specific cadastral district). As always there should not be any doubt about the direction of the 'is-part-of'-relationship.
    And, I'm not sure, whether the rather unspecific place is specific enough to exclude administrative units.
  3. having associated cadastral district (P10254) along with located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) makes it clear, that a cadastral district is not considered to be an administrative entity.

best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 07:38, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the original German discussion I forgot about the discussion we had at Wikidata:Property proposal/Cadastral areas. This property has two meanings that are both present in the original proposal but seem to be mutually exclusive:
  1. a relation between the smaller and the bigger, for example between a wayside cross (Q2309609) and the cadastral community where it’s located
  2. a relation between the bigger and the smaller, for example between a municipality and the cadastral communities it contains
Vojtěch Dostál mentioned that this property appears to be used in both directions but that doesn’t really make sense, does it? How can a property denote relations in both directions?
Given the clear wording of the description, I would recommend to limit the property to meaning 1 and delete statements that don’t comply. We might want to revisit Wikidata:Property proposal/Cadastral areas. Let’s ping JAn Dudík, Sapfan, Daniel Baránek, Maincomb, Zelenymuzik, Vojtěch Dostál, MasterRus21thCentury, ArthurPSmith from the discussion back then. --Emu (talk) 23:32, 29 August 2023 (UTC) -Emu (talk) 23:32, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Emu Yeah, it seemed a little weird back then. Adding of the statements was certainly an arduous process and I wouldn't want to ruin anyone's work, so let's first determine an alternative and then move all the corresponding statements from property 1 to property 2. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 05:45, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Property_talk:P10254&oldid=1964419376"