Wikidata:Property proposal/IEEE standard
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
IEEE Standard
[edit]Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic
| Description | identifier of an IEEE standard |
|---|---|
| Represents | IEEE standard (Q55755785) |
| Data type | External identifier |
| Domain | IEEE standard (Q55755785), IEEE standard version (Q55936932) |
| Example 1 | IEEE 1394 (Q181693) → 1394 |
| Example 2 | IEEE 754 (Q828287) → 754 |
| Example 3 | IEEE 802.11n (Q1193354) → 802.11n-2009 |
| Example 4 | IEEE 802.3 (Q570951) → 802.3 |
| Source | [1] |
Motivation
[edit]Same concept as existing property ISO standard (P503), but for IEEE standards. Dhx1 (talk) 13:48, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]
Support I don't suppose you can track down a formatter URL for these? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:41, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Comment @ArthurPSmith: https://standards.ieee.org/findstds/standard/$1.html is the formatter URL for IEEE standard version (Q55936932), but I can't find a formatter URL to also work with IEEE standard (Q55755785). I've added a formatter URL which provides search results in the IEEE Standards database, requiring a further click to select the correct standard. Is this OK? If not OK, the formatter URL can be removed. Dhx1 (talk) 17:53, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- I suggest you to switch to "last IEEE standard version (Q55936932)", change subject item to Q55936932, stay "external-id", and use "https://standards.ieee.org/findstds/standard/$1.html" as formatter URL. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 22:35, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Dhx1: I don't really like a search page as the landing page for an external ID. I think Visite fortuitement prolongée's suggestion just above (at least the formatter URL, I don't know the label really needs to change) would work. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:11, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- @ArthurPSmith: @Visite fortuitement prolongée: Formatter URL removed. I'm not so sure about changing the domain to just IEEE standard version (Q55936932), as there is a case for using a property like this on items which as instances of IEEE standard (Q55755785) as well. As far as I am aware, an "IEEE identifier" (which I can't find a definition for) has numerous different formats that have been used over the years. Some identifiers have dots, dashes, revision letters, no revision letters, etc so it isn't entirely consistent. For this reason, I intended to keep this property generic in a similar way to ISO standard (P503) which has a similar problem. How would you propose that this property be used if splitting it across two or more properties--one with a domain of IEEE standard (Q55755785) and the other with a domain of IEEE standard version (Q55936932)? As a sample of identifiers that would need to be catered for: IEEE 802.11 (Q193228) (series of standards), "IEEE Std 1703-2012", "IEEE Std 802.11v-2011", "IEEE Std 1609.4-2010/Cor 1-2014" and "ISO/IEC/IEEE 8802-3:2017/Amd.7:2017(E)". Dhx1 (talk) 12:41, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hmm, I guess I was thinking of restricting the domain here to just the versions, and linking the overall standard to individual versions with has edition or translation (P747) (or something like that). Would that make sense? It is nice to be able to go to the specific page... ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:48, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- @ArthurPSmith: I do like the idea of having a separate property for a version of a standard ("1703-2012", "802.11v-2011", etc). But should I also be creating a new property proposal for a corrigendum number, amendment number and perhaps also "IEEE series number" for items such as IEEE 802.11 (Q193228)? This decision impacts ISO standard (P503) and possibly other properties too. Dhx1 (talk) 13:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Also, it raises the question of whether "802" is the IEEE standard number, "1" is the IEEE standard part number, "Xbx" is edition number (P393) and "2014" is "publication year" for [2]. I can't find any information on whether the identifier of an IEEE standard is required to match any particular format. Dhx1 (talk) 13:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support — Dimon4ezzz 17:52, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, why don't we go ahead with this proposal, and then if it seems better to separate out the versions so they can have their own formatter URL that might be better as a separate property. I marked this as ready. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Dhx1, Visite fortuitement prolongée, Dimon4ezzz:
Done ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:53, 16 August 2018 (UTC)