Wikidata:Property proposal/Morse code
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Morse code
[edit]Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic
Not done
Description | code for a letter or number |
---|---|
Represents | Morse code (Q79897) |
Data type | External identifier |
Domain | items for letters and numbers |
Allowed values | [.-] |
Example 1 | A (Q9659) → .- |
Example 2 | E (Q9907) → . |
Example 3 | H (Q9914) → .... |
Example 4 | I (Q9893) → .. |
Example 5 | 5 (Q203) → ..... |
Planned use | add to relevant items |
Motivation
[edit](Add your motivation for this property here.)
--- Jura 00:34, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]- @Jura1:The examples are unclear and not IDs! --David (talk) 08:50, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- They should match the regex. If you have suggestions for a better formatting, I'm interested. The code should uniquely identify a letter/number, thus the choice of external-id.
--- Jura 09:11, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- They should match the regex. If you have suggestions for a better formatting, I'm interested. The code should uniquely identify a letter/number, thus the choice of external-id.
SupportOppose (intended to forestall this property's creation per Arthur's comments; will come back to this with more detail after some thought Mahir256 (talk) 20:59, 21 August 2018 (UTC)) @Jura1: even the generic motivations that User:Thierry Caro gives for his property proposals are immensely better than no express motivation given at all. Mahir256 (talk) 18:28, 11 August 2018 (UTC)- Somehow I followed GZW's sample. As any property I propose, I intend to add it to the relevant items. (I just added that in the proposal above).
--- Jura 19:18, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- Somehow I followed GZW's sample. As any property I propose, I intend to add it to the relevant items. (I just added that in the proposal above).
- Comment I support the property, but the choice of datatype is exotic. Is the usage only for letters and digits? Not for any phrases or signals such as SOS? That affects the choice of datatype. I also appreciate writing it out. Will support after. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 04:59, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support I guess it's all there already. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 10:45, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment (edited - see below) too few items would benefit from this property. It could be an interesting property (like a transcription) for lexemes perhaps though. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:51, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- No need. With this property on items, it could be calculated.
--- Jura 12:15, 18 August 2018 (UTC)- Alternatively, one could use code (P3295) with qualifier encoding (P3294) as for example in [1]. --Pasleim (talk) 18:31, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
- Didn't notice the values. Yes. A dedicated property would make it easier to ensure that they are unique and we don't miss some of them.
--- Jura 20:29, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
- @ArthurPSmith: With an import of Chinese characters coming along, and the existence of Chinese telegraph code (Q5100952), I'm not so sure about "too few"; also it'd be interesting to use this property for importing the contents of various telegraph code books somehow. Mahir256 (talk) 14:14, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Mahir256, Jura1: But Chinese telegraph code (Q5100952) is NOT Morse code. A property for Chinese telegraph code might be interesting. Or even a more generic "telegraph code" property with qualifier encoding (P3294) (Morse code (Q79897), Chinese telegraph code (Q5100952) or other) but of course that's not very different from just using code (P3295) with the same qualifier. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:25, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- A Chinese telegraph code property could also make use of this property. I added a sample for a digit above.
--- Jura 14:44, 20 August 2018 (UTC)- @Mahir256: wait, does Chinese telegraph code use morse code underneath for the digits? That seems - ah - very inefficient... ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:15, 20 August 2018 (UTC) (editing) and yet that's what enwiki says. Odd. Ok, some more comments below to clarify this all. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- A Chinese telegraph code property could also make use of this property. I added a sample for a digit above.
- @Mahir256, Jura1: But Chinese telegraph code (Q5100952) is NOT Morse code. A property for Chinese telegraph code might be interesting. Or even a more generic "telegraph code" property with qualifier encoding (P3294) (Morse code (Q79897), Chinese telegraph code (Q5100952) or other) but of course that's not very different from just using code (P3295) with the same qualifier. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:25, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- No need. With this property on items, it could be calculated.
Support(Second thoughts. Lymantria (talk) 05:42, 22 August 2018 (UTC)) The possible use extends the (indeed) limited items it directly applies to, as it can be a calculated property for words, longer codes, etc. Lymantria (talk) 16:35, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment @Jura1, Lymantria, Mahir256, Pasleim: So two more things that I feel need to be clarified here:
- Are the spaces in the code significant? The regex (which as written is invalid by the way - the '-' should be first) allows space, dot, and dash characters. In the examples above there is a space between each dot or dash. I would have thought that, if anything, spaces should only appear between distinct character codes (for example if we are to add them for Chinese telegraph codes, you would need a space between the codes for each digit). Is there a standard that can be referenced to describe how this is traditionally done in plain text? To call it an "external id" we need to have a single universally agreed string format for the codes, you can't have various alternatives with different spacings etc.
- We really need to pin down the domain. The international standard (ITU) Morse code only applies to the (capital) letters A-Z and digits 0-9. Do we intend to allow other characters or not? The enwiki page lists various extensions for punctuation and accented characters. Chinese has been suggested here, presumably a qualifier would be required to indicate the upper encoding. Are there other cases like this?
- I think I could support it if it applied to significantly more than just the 36 standard ITU characters, but the proposal so far isn't clear on either of these questions. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- No worries. I noted your oppose earlier about the proposal in its present form. Chinese telegraph codes wont work with the proposal in it's present form and they shouldn't.
--- Jura 21:34, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, Strong oppose then. But even so, you still haven't addressed the first question just above - why do you allow space in the regex (and have spaces in your examples) if you don't intend to allow this to be applied to anything other than the 36 characters? No morse code converter that I can find on the internet translates single characters to strings that have spaces, they are simple spaceless '...', '.-', etc. with the space character used to separate the code for one letter from another in a multi-letter string. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:11, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- No worries. I noted your oppose earlier about the proposal in its present form. Chinese telegraph codes wont work with the proposal in it's present form and they shouldn't.
- Comment thanks for your feedback. I think there is sufficient support for this property to be created. I don't see a point in including [0-9] for Chinese codes, but except the opposer, I don't think any does. If there are problems with implementing it, we can discuss it later/improve the format.
--- Jura 20:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)- @Jura1: you are being overeager with a poorly prepared proposal. @Mahir256, ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, Susannaanas, Pasleim, Lymantria: this is CLEARLY not ready as far as I can see, can one of you please comment in regard to the issues I've raised. And note that a very simple SPARQL query already returns the Morse code values for the letters (MINUS the spaces Jura inserted) - See tinyurl.com/y75euhhh . ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:32, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- I think that just illustrates the need for a separate property. We don't want Wikidata to be website with half the list.
--- Jura 20:39, 21 August 2018 (UTC)- @Jura1: I was slightly disappointed that you didn't react to the spaces-question by ArthurPSmith, but I see below you have removed the spaces in the proposal. Thanks for that. Perhaps you could enlighten ArthurPSmith and myself to show benefit of this proposal in the use of for instance racon signal (P3994), as the signals this property is about are in fact morse codes. Initially I thought your proposal would allow us to add the morse code as qualifier to values of this property, that would make sense to me. I'm starting to doubt about the usefulness. Lymantria (talk) 05:40, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Lymantria: It's a point that was there from the beginning and had been discussed, we could continue to debate if the spaces should be there, small, smaller, large, etc. Anyways, with this property, a query should allow to convert the P3994 value to Morse. If the current list wasn't incomplete and we had checks in place to ensure it's robustness, it could also be done with the P3295/4 version. Unfortunately the current approach is somewhat unsatisfactory.
Chinese codes could use the same to convert into Morse signals.
--- Jura 05:49, 22 August 2018 (UTC)- @Jura1: What I was thinking of is . Seems not intended by your proposal (and needs a space in the regex). Lymantria (talk) 05:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Lymantria: Yes, I understood that. For simple lookup. it might be easier to link the items with the code. If there is interest, we could have another property that transcribes texts into morse.
--- Jura 06:10, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Lymantria: Yes, I understood that. For simple lookup. it might be easier to link the items with the code. If there is interest, we could have another property that transcribes texts into morse.
- @Jura1: What I was thinking of is . Seems not intended by your proposal (and needs a space in the regex). Lymantria (talk) 05:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Lymantria: It's a point that was there from the beginning and had been discussed, we could continue to debate if the spaces should be there, small, smaller, large, etc. Anyways, with this property, a query should allow to convert the P3994 value to Morse. If the current list wasn't incomplete and we had checks in place to ensure it's robustness, it could also be done with the P3295/4 version. Unfortunately the current approach is somewhat unsatisfactory.
- @Jura1: I was slightly disappointed that you didn't react to the spaces-question by ArthurPSmith, but I see below you have removed the spaces in the proposal. Thanks for that. Perhaps you could enlighten ArthurPSmith and myself to show benefit of this proposal in the use of for instance racon signal (P3994), as the signals this property is about are in fact morse codes. Initially I thought your proposal would allow us to add the morse code as qualifier to values of this property, that would make sense to me. I'm starting to doubt about the usefulness. Lymantria (talk) 05:40, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- I think that just illustrates the need for a separate property. We don't want Wikidata to be website with half the list.
- @Jura1: you are being overeager with a poorly prepared proposal. @Mahir256, ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, Susannaanas, Pasleim, Lymantria: this is CLEARLY not ready as far as I can see, can one of you please comment in regard to the issues I've raised. And note that a very simple SPARQL query already returns the Morse code values for the letters (MINUS the spaces Jura inserted) - See tinyurl.com/y75euhhh . ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:32, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose code (P3295) with encoding (P3294) suffices as shown by ArthurPSmith's query. Chinese telegraph code (Q5100952) can also be added in this way. Uniqueness and completness can be ensured with complex constraints. --Pasleim (talk) 20:47, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment we need to find a way to improve the current, clearly unsatisfying situation. I simplified the string format @Lymantria, Mahir256, Susannaanas: what do you think? Do you still support it?
--- Jura 03:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)- Change to Neutral for now, see above. Lymantria (talk) 05:40, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment I see no big reason to object, it's better now. I'd rather be Neutral and let someone with clear objection or support voice out. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 11:09, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support Worldm99 (talk) 12:39, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose. Redundant to existing properties. --Yair rand (talk) 17:50, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Yair rand, Worldm99, Jura1, ArthurPSmith:@Mahir256, ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, Susannaanas, Pasleim, Lymantri: Not done, given that it has more opposition then support. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 16:18, 12 November 2018 (UTC)