Wikidata:Property proposal/valid for
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
valid for[edit]
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic
Withdrawn
| Description | indicates when a given value has validity constraints. For example, effective date for a law may have multiple values, each date valid for certain sections of the law. |
|---|---|
| Represents | Different from applies to part (P518) |
| Data type | Monolingual text |
| Domain | date, legislation, agreement etc. |
| Allowed values | manually entered text. |
| Example 1 | Forty-second Amendment of the Constitution of India (Q5472937) (effective date→) 1 August 1979 → Section 17 |
| Example 2 | Forty-second Amendment of the Constitution of India (Q5472937) (effective date→) 1 August 1979 → Section 21 |
| Example 3 | Forty-second Amendment of the Constitution of India (Q5472937) (effective date→) 6 September 1979 → Section 24 |
| Expected completeness | always incomplete (Q21873886) |
| See also | effective date |
Motivation[edit]
While working on Amendments of the Constitution of India, I have found many amendments with multiple effective dates. So this property is needed as a qualifier to indicate the sections for each date, without creating separate items for those sections. Hrishikes (talk) 04:18, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Discussion[edit]
Comment I think this is what applies to part (P518) is for, isn't it? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:44, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
- Values for applies to part (P518) need to be separate items. Articles of the Constitution may merit individual items, but all the sections of every Act, including constitutional amendment Acts, do not merit separate items. That's why I proposed for this parameter, "valid for", where the relevant sections can be added manually. Otherwise, we will need basically unnecessary creation of items for hundreds, even thousands of sections for various Acts. Hrishikes (talk) 02:07, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
- Why not? We have items even for many Bible versicles, like John 3:16 (Q397709), Genesis 1:1 (Q4101743), and chapters, like Revelation 22 (Q16160740). I fear that a string equivalent of applies to part (P518) could be misused. Therefore,
Strong oppose. --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 18:44, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
- Why not? We have items even for many Bible versicles, like John 3:16 (Q397709), Genesis 1:1 (Q4101743), and chapters, like Revelation 22 (Q16160740). I fear that a string equivalent of applies to part (P518) could be misused. Therefore,
- Values for applies to part (P518) need to be separate items. Articles of the Constitution may merit individual items, but all the sections of every Act, including constitutional amendment Acts, do not merit separate items. That's why I proposed for this parameter, "valid for", where the relevant sections can be added manually. Otherwise, we will need basically unnecessary creation of items for hundreds, even thousands of sections for various Acts. Hrishikes (talk) 02:07, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
- Comment as currently structured, a generic "valid for" property could be misused instead of the existing specific properties applies to jurisdiction (P1001), valid in place (P3005), valid in period (P1264), applies to part (P518), and applies to people (P6001). Is there some way to use one of these qualifiers together with section, verse, paragraph, or clause (P958) (which takes a string value rather than an item) to solve your problem? - PKM (talk) 19:37, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
- @PKM: -- But that would need a joint qualifier. applies to part (P518) and section, verse, paragraph, or clause (P958) to jointly qualify the value for effective date, with a single value for the joint qualifier. I don't think I have seen such a thing yet. Hrishikes (talk) 03:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
- As has been pointed out, the proposal appears to be defective. So I am withdrawing it. I'll rethink on the matter and submit an amended proposal, if required. Hrishikes (talk) 06:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)