3 ms·
In the longer term, "semantic drift" might also be a problem. The article keeps referring to the example of the mayor of San Francisco. But the definition of ma
by bloak 5y ago
In the longer term, "semantic drift" might also be a problem. The article keeps referring to the example of the mayor of San Francisco. But the definition of mayor (i.e. what the job involves) changes over time, and the definition of San Francisco (i.e. precise boundaries, legal status) changes over time. Perhaps in this case there haven't been and won't be any major changes during the period of history we care about, but if you define millions of these QIDs there will presumably be a constant flow of awkward language-dependent questions about what they should refer to.
- adwn 5y agoHow could this be any worse than tracking and updating those shifts of definition across thousands of articles in hundreds of different languages?
- johnday 5y agoThe point is that "mayors of San Fransisco" does not have a single answer, and therefore any answer WikiData provides will be glossing over a mountain of nuance and important distinctions in terminology. The same is true of a million million different individual and aggregated data points all across WikiData.
- adwn 5y agoIn the context of Wikipedia articles about the Western US city commonly called "San Francisco", the concept of "mayor" is sufficiently well defined that there is a single answer to it. The concerns voiced here sound a little like "What if in a hundred years, GPT-255 has subjugated all of humanity into a hive-mind and the terms 'San Francisco' and 'mayor' are meaningless?" Yes, well. One thing at a time.
- johnday 5y agoI was using the singular example from the parent comment. If it would convince you more, I will provide others - though I'm sure you could think of some yourself, if the mood took you.