[Data-modeling] Proposed changes to Deity properties

[Faye Harris]

+1 on (a).

-- Faye


Kirrily Robert wrote:
> We could just change the display name, which isn't even a schema  
> change.  I'd fully support this.  I prefer "Religion(s) that worship  
> this deity".
>
> K.
>
> On Mar 5, 2009, at 4:01 PM, Jeff Fry wrote:
>
>   
>> I just noticed a pile of topics that had been mistyped as religions,
>> including: Fire, Commerce, Wine, and Spring. Looking at Fire
>> <http://www.freebase.com/view/guid/9202a8c04000641f800000000000ece0>I
>> couldn't understand why this happened  ...Until I drilled into Vulcan
>> <http://www.freebase.com/view/en/vulcan>. Asserting that he is a  
>> "Deity
>> of" Fire is quite reasonable, and the fact that we expect a Religion
>> here isn't obvious.
>>
>> It seems like we need to (a) give the deity_of property a less  
>> ambiguous
>> name, and possibly also (b) add a new property to capture things like
>> that Vulcan is a fire god -- possibly something like "Sphere(s)" or
>> "Domain(s)" with an ECT like "Religious Sphere".
>>
>> As far as (a) my first inclination is to name the property "Diety Of
>> (Religion)". Another option: "Religion(s) That Worship This Deity",
>> which follows the grammar of "People of this ethnicity:",  
>> "Organizations
>> in this sector:", etc...though it's a longer name.
>>
>> For (b) I'll propose a new property named Sphere with an ECT of
>> Religious Sphere. This would enable, say, a view of fire gods across
>> religions.
>>
>> If this sounds good to folks I'll go ahead and make these changes.  
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Jeff
>> _______________________________________________
>> Data-modeling mailing list
>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>>     
>
>