From: Yaron K. <ya...@gm...> - 2007-04-30 16:51:25
|
Hi, I set up SMW 0.7, along with MediaWiki 1.9.3, on Discourse DB yesterday. Overall it looks good, though there are a few issues that might be bugs. One issue is that the "Enumeration" type doesn't seem to be working. You can see the attribute that uses it here: http://discoursedb.org/wiki/Attribute:Publication_type And here's a page that uses it: http://discoursedb.org/wiki/The_Boston_Globe See factbox for both. Then again, is this feature even officially supported? Thanks, Yaron |
From: S P. <ski...@ea...> - 2007-04-30 21:44:18
|
Yaron Koren wrote: > I set up SMW 0.7, along with MediaWiki 1.9.3, on Discourse DB > yesterday. > One issue is that the "Enumeration" type doesn't seem > to be working. Markus checked in a change of the special property's name from "Possible values" to "Allows value", and you now specify each value in a separate annotation. > http://discoursedb.org/wiki/Attribute:Publication_type I changed the name there and split out the permissible values, and now http://discoursedb.org/wiki/The_Boston_Globe seems to work. I've updated various documentation pages on ontoworld.org with the new name. > is this feature even officially supported? I assume it isn't going away. Markus, what say you? It's better now than before: multiple attributes avoids hitting string property length limit when there are many values for the enumeration. I thought about separating each permissible value into a separate special property, my concerns were a) database performance for multiple records, probably not a significant factor. b) I wasn't sure that the order in which the database would retrieve the allowed values is guaranteed to match the order they appear on the page. Now is as good a time as any to offer my apologies for not contributing to the 0.7 release. :-( I'm sorry and hope to do better. -- =S Page |
From: Yaron K. <ya...@gm...> - 2007-04-30 22:07:16
|
Thanks! Now it works perfectly. One of the nice things about working with wikis is that other people can actually fix your mistakes. :) I think the new format is better: it's more in keeping with the spirit of the semantic web, which maps relationships between entities, not arrays. Also, the new format allows for commas in enumeration values. The nondeterministic order for the values might be an issue. Though not a big one, I don't think. -Yaron On 4/30/07, S Page <ski...@ea...> wrote: > Yaron Koren wrote: > > I set up SMW 0.7, along with MediaWiki 1.9.3, on Discourse DB > > yesterday. > > One issue is that the "Enumeration" type doesn't seem > > to be working. > > Markus checked in a change of the special property's name from "Possible > values" to "Allows value", and you now specify each value in a separate > annotation. > > > http://discoursedb.org/wiki/Attribute:Publication_type > > I changed the name there and split out the permissible values, and now > http://discoursedb.org/wiki/The_Boston_Globe seems to work. > > I've updated various documentation pages on ontoworld.org with the new name. > > > is this feature even officially supported? > > I assume it isn't going away. Markus, what say you? It's better now > than before: multiple attributes avoids hitting string property length > limit when there are many values for the enumeration. > > I thought about separating each permissible value into a separate > special property, my concerns were > a) database performance for multiple records, probably not a significant > factor. > b) I wasn't sure that the order in which the database would retrieve the > allowed values is guaranteed to match the order they appear on the page. > > > > Now is as good a time as any to offer my apologies for not contributing > to the 0.7 release. :-( I'm sorry and hope to do better. > > -- > =S Page > |
From: S P. <ski...@ea...> - 2007-05-01 04:19:44
|
Yaron Koren wrote: > The nondeterministic order for the values might be an issue. I just confirmed in my local copy using MySQL that the [[allows value]] special properties aren't necessarily stored or retrieved in the same order as they appear on the page. > Though not a big one, I don't think. Well it means you can't sort by an enumerated value in inline queries or query for values "greater" than some enumerated value. For ordered enumerations like a bug severity that's a problem. I filed http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9750 -- =S |