Talk:Q333634

@Andreasmperu:, care to explain this edit? My goal was to integrate this into the semantic tree for creator, similar to what can be seen in the Reasonator page for "writer":

• creator (Q2500638): person who does creative work
• author (Q482980): a writer of a book, article, or document (subclass : literary works: writer [Q36180])
• writer (Q36180): person who uses written words to communicate ideas and to produce literary works
• translator (Q333634): person who translates written text from one language to another <-- my proposal

--Waldir (talk) 03:15, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

translator (Q333634) - person who creates (translated) text (from original text), so superset - creator (Q2500638) --Fractaler (talk) 13:26, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand what you mean, @Fractaler:. Are you agreeing with me that creator (Q2500638) should be a superset of translator (Q333634)? --Waldir (talk) 13:09, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

creator - "person who does creative work". We need description for "creative work" (creative work (Q17537576)?). If "translated text" is subset of "creative work", then creator (Q2500638) should be a superset of translator (Q333634) --Fractaler (talk) 13:17, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

That makes sense. I agree we should create the relationships translation (Q7553)subclass of (P279)creative work (Q17537576) and translator (Q333634)subclass of (P279)creator (Q2500638).

(By the way, we might also consider whether we'd like to have relationships like translator (Q333634)product or material produced or service provided (P1056)translation (Q7553) and creator (Q2500638)product or material produced or service provided (P1056)creative work (Q17537576), or if we'd need a separate property for that.) --Waldir (talk) 15:12, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Good idea. But yet translation (Q7553) can be 1) with creative (in poetry (Q482) area) 2) without (auto, mechanical - science text and so on). And mechanical - by human and by computer system. System of machine translation (Q79798) product or material produced or service provided (P1056) creative work (Q17537576) (translation (Q7553)), it is translator (Q333634)? If no creative, then translation (Q7553) - data conversion (Q1783551), and translator (Q333634) - simply Converter (Q292763). And then wikidata - translator (Q333634) --Fractaler (talk) 16:06, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm having a hard time following exactly what proposals you are making. Perhaps try writing directly in Russian and I'll try (appropriately enough) an automated translator? --Waldir (talk) 19:48, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

I mean 1) translator (Q333634): a) is human (Q5) b) is computer program (Q40056) c) is human (Q5)+computer program (Q40056). 2) translation (Q7553): a) is a poetry translation (Q7553) b) is translation (Q7553) of technical texts с) is a poetry translation (Q7553) + translation (Q7553) of technical texts --Fractaler (talk) 12:45, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Good points. I just created machine translation software (Q28031555) so that translator (Q333634) can refer unambiguously to human translators. This way we can define the output of a translator (Q333634) to be always a creative work (Q17537576). Does that sound good to you? --Waldir (talk) 14:06, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Google Translate (Q135622) is not a translator? --Fractaler (talk) 14:44, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

The current defnition of translator (Q333634) is "person who translates text from one language to another", so Google Translator does not fit, as it is not a person. --Waldir (talk) 18:55, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Now we have subsets 1) machine translation software (Q28031555) (computer program or service that performs automatic translation of texts and 2) translator (Q333634) (person who translates text from one language to another). What is a set (name)? --Fractaler (talk) 09:18, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't know what to call it, but we certainly benefit by having the specific subsets (especially because conceptually we do make that distinction, i.e. we're more likely to talk about one or the other, but not so much about the superset including both). We can always make the connection between the two later, once a good taxonomy for the combined set is found, but in the meantime, they're both integrated into the corresponding subclass_of hierarchies, so they're not exactly orphaned. --Waldir (talk) 14:14, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Superset for that 2 sets - something like Converter (Q292763) (here - convert from one language to another, by program or by human) --Fractaler (talk) 16:32, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

That's certainly a possibility, but it could be seen as a bit of a stretch. If we are to make such a connection, I think a few more voices should be heard on the matter. --Waldir (talk) 22:19, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

next clearing of "person who translates text". text (Q234460) is homonym (Q160843): =1) poetry (Q482) =2) prose (Q676) =3) text with specialized terminology (Q1391494) (technical translation (Q2993806)). Then: only writing (Q37260)? Or only spoken language (Q1322198)? Or writing (Q37260) + spoken language (Q1322198)? --Fractaler (talk) 07:12, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Fractaler, if you don't write in full sentences it's very hard to understand what you're trying to say. --Waldir (talk) 11:37, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

We have description: "person who translates text". What kind of text (1 -poetry (Q482), 2 - prose (Q676), 3 - text with specialized terminology (Q1391494))? And only text? How about spoken language (Q1322198)? --Fractaler (talk) 13:20, 25 December 2016 (UTC)