[Data-modeling] Descriptions for types

[Tom Morris]

Important enough to have a thread of its own...

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Philip Kendall
<philip-freebase at shadowmagic.org.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 09:07:27AM -0800, Bryan Cheung wrote:
>> Looks like it was done as part of DA-590 (https://bugs.freebase.com/browse/DA-590
>> ).
>> All /architecture/structure topics were typed with the included type /
>> projects/project_focus .
>
> Hijacking this thread slightly, I suggest types should not be considered
> for promotion to commons unless they have at the very minimum a top-level
> description and preferably descriptions for their properties as well. I
> was as confused as Tom when I saw this type.
>
> Thoughts?

Absolutely.  If this could be a requirement for new types that would
be great, but there's also a substantial number of types already in
commons with no description, so this backlog should be worked off
(obviously it will take time).

Tom