Rosetta Code:Village Pump/SMW Examples by language and concept: Difference between revisions
Rosetta Code:Village Pump/SMW Examples by language and concept (view source)
Revision as of 15:47, 29 June 2011
, 12 years agoI'd far prefer a solution derived from queries than autogenerated properties.
(I feel like two tags would over-complicate things) |
(I'd far prefer a solution derived from queries than autogenerated properties.) |
||
Line 22:
:: The more natural SMW form, I think, would have the page tag with <nowiki>[[demonstration of::language]][[shows concept::concept]]</nowiki>. (It may be desirable to use [[Property:Demonstrates language]] and [[Property:Demonstrates concept]], rather than [[Property:Demonstration of]]; you can have languages and concepts (and many other things, such as implementations, libraries, etc) which share names, but you wouldn't want to confuse the engine into thinking one is the other. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 14:30, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
:::<nowiki>[[demonstration of::language]]</nowiki> seems redundant because we already have <nowiki>[[implemented in language::language]]</nowiki>. I really think it's best to keep it all in one tag and let the property pages do some of the work. If we do it with the two tags then we will have two property pages which don't mean what we want until they're connected on some other page with a query. If each language has its own property page then things are already wrapped up nicely. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 14:51, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
:::: That's the purpose of semantic properties and queries, though, to be queried against to produce results dependent on data relationships. I'm guessing you meant {{prop|demonstration of language}} was redundant because we have {{prop|implemented in language}}, and you would be right. This kind of thing is why I created {{prop|implemented in language}} in the first place. I also don't like each language having its own property page from the perspective that semantic properties are supposed to describe simple relationships, as opposed to describing complicated things. Defining a semantic query is pretty simple; SMW comes with [[Special:Ask]] to help you do it. They're also not significantly computationally expensive; we have three of them on the main page. I'd far prefer a solution derived from queries than additional autogenerated properties; that's why we got SMW and MultiCategorySearch in the first place. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 15:47, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
::*This of course is dependent on dicussions about the property organization
:*This template should go under each language header as the examples get tagged, and it would not display anything. We would need one template for each concept (a la {{tmpl|works with}}).
| |||