Property talk:P366
Documentation
main use of the subject (includes current and former usage)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P366#Scope, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P366#Entity types
Replacement property: samples from work (P5707)
Replacement values: (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P366#none of, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P366#Conflicts with P31, search, SPARQL
Replacement property:
Replacement values: exhibition space (Q15206795) (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P366#none of, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P366#Conflicts with P279, search, SPARQL
|
This property is being used by:
Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
"used as"?
[edit]Is this only "used as", or also "used for" (for example, an inhaler is used for inhalation)? --AVRS (talk) 15:44, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Unsure. "Used for" is a useful thing to have but I am not happy with the structural inconsistency introduced by conflating the two things in the same property. --Zolo (talk) 11:59, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- I think I would say yes, as having two properties may be rather confusing, especially in a multilingual context, for no major advantages. Actually even common English usage tends to mix different types of relations ("office building" vs "mixed-use building"). --Zolo (talk) 20:19, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
- "Used as" should be discouraged usage (Its just another way to say "is a") However, the aliased meaning of "Used in" and "Used for" should be encouraged usage of this property. Instead of "used as", you can think differently and actually restate with "instance of" or sometimes "subclass of". You can say A Movie is a class or form of Entertainment. But you can also say A Movie is "used for" "provides" Entertainment. Both would be correct, so it depends on context of the entities. Thadguidry (talk) 14:51, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Residential use
[edit]Any ideas on which item we should use to indicate that a building is residential? There are many articles on wikipedia on the subjects of residential, housing, and so on. But, I don't see one which is an obvious fit for this property. Danrok (talk) 15:46, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
- I think residence (Q699405) is alright (if as suggested above we use this proerty for both "used for" and "used as")
Other than buildings
[edit]It looks like the "use" property is not limited to buildings anymore. So, is using this property for other things allowed? --AmaryllisGardener talk 19:55, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Inverse property
[edit]@Infovarius: If a knife is used for cutting, cutting is used by a knife ??? I don't get the inverse property you just set. author TomT0m / talk page 13:05, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, I am wrong. I meant item operated (P121) vs Wikidata property example (P1855). Note that the scope of the first property was changed recently, I start the discussion. --Infovarius (talk) 14:08, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
drop the "main use"
[edit]- human (Q5) is used for transportation of various things, including infants
- used by (P1535) is not limited to "main use", I see no reason to limit has use (P366) for whatever considered "main".
- "primary" can be modeled using qualifier series ordinal (P1545) = 1 (primary use), series ordinal (P1545) = 2 (secondary) and so on.
d1g (talk) 18:07, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- That use of series ordinal (P1545) is much too big a stretch. Swpb (talk) 17:16, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
- Do we have a better property/qulifier to order values? d1g (talk) 23:16, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
I have to admit that Q5, Q32489 and Q11748378 would have many uses (seval thousands), not just hundreds. It should be possible to enter a dozen/hundeds of uses to something specific and rare. My reasoning is that it is easier to populate single item ATM, not hundreds. d1g (talk) 23:16, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Qualifier for Q350176
[edit]
? I used
at desiccant (Q13221746) d1g (talk) 20:52, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Expand subject constraint
[edit]I'd like to add technique (Q28165751) as a subject type for this property - see pouncing (Q3493717) for an example. - PKM (talk) 01:54, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- Actually, I'd like to go one step up the class hierarchy and add process (Q3249551) instead. Processes “use” tools and other processes. - PKM (talk) 04:47, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
- No. Many, probably most, items with "use" are not processes. has use (P366) is used on tons of objects, for example. Swpb (talk) 18:27, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Property usage for software
[edit]While editing software items I came across different approaches to define the main use of an application. Some entries use instance of (P31) to describe the aim of the software (e.g. ontology editor (Q453843) or word processor (Q54277)). This can be found in Microsoft Word (Q11261) or in Protégé (Q2066865). Others like the entry of Wikibase (Q16354758) define the aim with has use (P366). Could you indicate you would see the correct use of has use (P366) in this case? Is has use (P366) intended to describe the aim of software? Katjos (talk) – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Katjos (talk • contribs) at 19:28, 7. Mar. 2018 (UTC).
- I've got the same question. --Nw520 (talk) 13:20, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
has_use compared with instance_of
[edit]Is there guidance as when to use has use (P366) and when instance of (P31). For example a battleship that has become a museum ship (Q575727) at the end of its career. I'd argue that battleship should be instance of (P31) as its always that, but museum_ship is has use (P366) because that's a use its taken on, but others disagree. Vicarage (talk) 19:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Can you point us to where others have disagreed? Do you have any other examples we can try to generalize from? In the battleship case, I believe both statements are valid and could both appear, but has use (P366) better reflects the temporal nature of the museum role; I'd qualify a instance of (P31) statement with date(s). Swpb (talk) 13:28, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- User_talk:Hjart#c-Hjart-20220824154400-Vicarage-20220824154000 was the disagreement, which I hope will be discussed at Talk:Q575727. Both properties should have date ranges to me. I notice that other things that have become museums, like forts have 160 instances and only 9 has_use. Vicarage (talk) 14:15, 26 August 2022 (UTC)