-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add type
parameter to suggest property queries
#104
Comments
Sorry, the wording there seems confusing to me. You say: QUERY "includes a type= query parameter to its auto-completion HTTP calls for properties,"
RESPONSE "reconciliation service to suggest properties which are relevant for the given type."
So, in QUERY and RESPONSE which are truly OPTIONAL and which are MUST INCLUDE? QUERY
RESPONSE - @wetneb should it return suggesting "properties of the Type of the Property" that was specified in the previous query?
|
I feel like something is missing from @thadguidry's response? |
re "unspecified parameters" The "spec" for OpenRefine is the current implementation. There isn't a separate specification, although in this particular case, the relevant documentation for the parameters that OpenRefine is sending is part of the Freebase Suggest API which, in turn, refers to the Freebase Search API. I'll quote the docs here in case Google removes them in the future:
Parameter name Value Description Acceptable values are: The filter value is a simple language that supports the following symbols: the all, any, should and not operators format string Structural format of the JSON response. Acceptable values are: Acceptable values are: Acceptable values are: |
clarified by adding my question to @wetneb directly on the RESPONSE |
I clearly disagree. Given that OpenRefine itself has basically no documentation of its own implementation, this would amount to saying that service implementers are expected to reverse-engineer OpenRefine to figure out the protocol. I did that 5 years ago for the Wikidata service and I do not want this to be what we wish other service implementers. My expectation (and the whole point of founding this W3C group) is that OpenRefine aligns to the W3C spec, and follows it as it evolves. That has been happening for some years already and I see no reason to stop this move. |
The quotes around "spec" that @tfmorris used is a way Americans sometimes say softly or loosely or unreal. So, soft "spec" or loose "spec". He wasn't saying real spec. Which we do need and he knows, and also was helpful giving the doc links to improve the real spec we're drafting in W3C. |
OpenRefine includes a
type=
query parameter to its auto-completion HTTP calls for properties, letting the reconciliation service to suggest properties which are relevant for the given type.This parameter is not currently mentioned in the specs: I would propose to add it.
OpenRefine also includes other unspecified parameters in its queries:
https://wikidata.reconci.link/en/suggest/property?prefix=test&spell=always&exact=false&scoring=schema&prefixed=true&type=Q223393
I would remove the
spell=always
,exact=false
,scoring=schema
andprefixed=true
from those calls unless someone can find a meaning for them, which would make them useful for a broad range of services.See also: https://forum.openrefine.org/t/suggest-property-request-always-includes-a-type/264
OpenRefine issue: OpenRefine/OpenRefine#5523
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: