Wikidata:Property proposal/items for this type

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

items for this type[edit]

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

   Not done
Descriptionall the instances/subclasses of the subject item should have the object item or an instance/subclass of the object item
Data typeItem
Domainqualifier of properties for this type (P1963)
Allowed valuesall items
ExampleWindows software (Q15593630)
properties for this type
Normal rank operating system Arbcom ru editing.svg edit
items for this type Microsoft Windows
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference

+ add value
See alsoitem of property constraint (P2305)


It allows to indicate specific items that every instance/subclass of the subject item should have. Malore (talk) 16:22, 28 April 2018 (UTC)


Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @David: They are two different properties:
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ah, I see you have proposed this for item-valued properties too. Anyway, I don't think this is the right approach here... ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:18, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment@ArthurPSmith: I think there are three approaches:
  1. introduce "item constraints": same of "property constraints" but for items. The most powerful because it allows to indicate properties, values, properties that shouldn't be used, etc. and it allows to warn if these constraints are not satisfied;
  2. this approach: make normal properties to indicate constraints. Less powerful because it doesn't warn if they are not satisfied but easier to implement;
  3. divide item statements in "statements for this item" and "statements for this type": the former refer only to the subject item, while the latter are inherited by the instances/subclasses of the item. It's equivalent to something like "members require statement constraint" with item of property constraint (P2305) qualifier.
I chose the second one because it's easier and quicker to implement--Malore (talk) 16:58, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
@Malore: Hmm, your suggestion 1 I think is a good idea, there have been other situations that seemed to require it (many property constraints are really item constraints on instances of, for example, Q5). However, that probably requires some lengthy discussions with the developers of how to implement and I agree is not likely to be available soon. I was actually thinking something along the lines of your option 3 - to add a qualifier to indicate the scope of a given property statement - i.e. applies to self, applies to instances, applies to all subclasses, etc. I don't think that requires any development. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:30, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: I totally agree with you. Such a qualifier is better than using properties like this one because it's not redundant. However, I don't know if there are items where a statement is true only for its instances/subclasses and not for the item itself. In such cases, a qualifier is not adequate.--Malore (talk) 23:42, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

--Micru (talk) 21:46, 24 August 2014 (UTC) Tobias1984 (talk) TomT0m (talk) Genewiki123 (talk) Emw (talk) 03:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC) —Ruud 16:15, 9 December 2014 (UTC) Emitraka (talk) 14:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC) Bovlb (talk) 19:10, 21 October 2015 (UTC) Peter F. Patel-Schneider (talk) 22:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC) ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:51, 5 November 2015 (UTC) --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC) --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 22:00, 27 February 2016 (UTC) --Lechatpito (talk) --Andrawaag (talk) 14:42, 13 April 2016 (UTC) --ChristianKl (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC) --Cmungall Cmungall (talk) 13:49, 8 July 2016 (UTC) Cord Wiljes (talk) 16:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC) DavRosen (talk) 23:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 07:01, 24 February 2017 (UTC) Pintoch (talk) 22:42, 5 March 2017 (UTC) Fuzheado (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2017 (UTC) YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC) PKM (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Fractaler (talk) 14:42, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Andreasmperu Andreasmperu

Diana de la Iglesia Jsamwrites (talk) Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:39, 24 August 2017 (UTC) Alessandro Piscopo (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2017 (UTC) Ptolusque (.-- .. -.- ..) 01:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC) Gamaliel (talk) --Horcrux92 (talk) 11:19, 12 November 2017 (UTC) MartinPoulter (talk) Bamyers99 (talk) 16:47, 18 March 2018 (UTC) Malore (talk) Wurstbruch (talk) 22:59, 4 April 2018 (UTC) Dcflyer (talk) 07:50, 9 September 2018 (UTC) Ettorerizza (talk) 11:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC) Ninokeys (talk) 00:05, 5 October 2018 (UTC) Buccalon (talk) 14:08, 10 October 2018 (UTC) Jneubert (talk) 06:02, 21 October 2018 (UTC) Yair rand (talk) 00:16, 24 October 2018 (UTC) Tris T7 (talk) ElanHR (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2018 (UTC) linuxo Gq86 Gabrielaltay Liamjamesperritt (talk) 08:44, 21 June 2019 (UTC) ZI Jony Ivanhercaz (Talk) 11:07, 15 July 2019 (UTC) Gaurav (talk) 22:39, 24 August 2019 (UTC) Meejies (talk) 04:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC) SilentSpike (talk) Tfrancart (talk) TiagoLubiana (talk) 15:12, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Ontology

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just use subject item of this property (P1629), as well as we use connecting line (P81) as both statements and qualifiers. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:22, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • marking as  Not done, no support − Pintoch (talk) 08:10, 10 June 2018 (UTC)