As an anonymous user, you can only add new data. If you would like to also modify existing data, please create an account and indicate your languages on your user page.

Help talk:Relation

From OmegaWiki
(Redirected from Talk:Relation)
Jump to: navigation, search

bidirectional[edit]

Moved from International_Beer_Parlour#Relations

Since the new features of 27/9 relations are bidirectional (see above). In my opinion we can now remove the Expression:narrower terms and only use the Expression:broader terms. The narrower terms will automatically show on the Incoming relations. Would this be a good idea?.
Furthermore there is discussion about the use of Expression:broader terms for only subset relations and a new kind of relation for subpart/element relation. See for background on User_talk:HenkvD#Countries_and_Continents and User_talk:HenkvD#Relations. Personally I prefer a simple approach: a general broader terms to be used for all. HenkvD 21:09, 28 September 2006 (CEST)

Also it would be fine to make clear what narrower/broader means — Does "incoming relation 'broader term'" mean that we are looking at the broader term, or at the narrower term? Does "incoming relation 'broader term'" mean, it comes from the broader term, or from the narrower term? I have not set these relations yet, since I could not find out, what they mean. --Purodha Blissenbach 16:09, 30 September 2006 (CEST)
An example: a narrower term of chemistry is analytical chemistry.
As incoming relations analytical chemistry will have Other defined meaning chemistry with Relation type narrower terms.
HenkvD 23:29, 30 September 2006 (CEST)
I agree with HenkvD's proposal. Otherwise it would always be necessary to edit two entries in order to add that relation. With both kinds of relation (broader and narrower) it is possible that the relations are inconsistent.
For example deuterium was part of theme hydrogen but in the entry tritium hydrogen was entered as broader term. In the entry hydrogen both isotopes were correctly entered as narrower terms. This is already corrected but there may be similar examples. --Ortografix 15:42, 29 October 2006 (CET)

semantic relations[edit]

Expression:hypernym, Expression:hyponym, Expression:antonym? I believe hypernym/hyponym have more exact meaning than 'narrower term' and 'broader term'. Antonym is missing.

Classes[edit]

Per end of September 2007 relations have changed . Relations are now associated with a "class" and this class defines what relation types are possible. There are still incomming relations, but I cannot find the relations anymore, nor is it clear how to update it. HenkvD 15:55, 29 September 2007 (EDT)