Changes

Line 41: Line 41:     
::::Thanks for all the new Attributes and Relations. The ASK query at state level is pretty slick!--[[User:OmniMediaGroup|OmniMediaGroup]] 14:05, 12 January 2007 (PST)
 
::::Thanks for all the new Attributes and Relations. The ASK query at state level is pretty slick!--[[User:OmniMediaGroup|OmniMediaGroup]] 14:05, 12 January 2007 (PST)
 +
 +
===Attributes & Relations===
 +
Karen, I'm in the process of writing up [[Centiare:Semantic_tagging|guidelines]] for creating custom attributes & relations. Since I haven't completed it yet, I'll step in here real quick to provide a brief overview.
 +
 +
One thing I'm going to emphasize is the decision one must make between creating an attribute or relation for non-numeric values. That is, the logic is pretty clear about creating attributes for values like population, revenues, etc.
 +
 +
Where it can get a little fuzzy is if the value '''''could be''''' a relation (ie target page in which to create a relationship between articles). In this case, you can still choose to use an attribute, like CEO for a job title, BA for degree, etc, rather than a relation to main space articles that define/explain the meaning of those terms.
 +
 +
In the case of recipe_name, you start moving down the path closer to creating a relationship, especially if you anticipate creating stand-alone recipe pages in the future. Situations where relationships already work really well can be seen with the city->county->state->country roll-ups, etc.
 +
 +
Finally, there's the issue of ''ordinal'' identification ie situations where there may be multiple values '''OR''' associations between values, such as degree(s)<->year(s). Right now, relationships don't handle either very well (typically, they need an additional category identifier), but attributes are just the ticket. So even if something was logically a relationship, if you're going to have a complex data set, you may decide to use attributes instead. [[User:Centiare|Centiare]] 09:11, 13 January 2007 (PST)
3,699

edits