Talk:Q3054943
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Autodescription — set of numbers (Q3054943)
description: metaclass of sets of numbers
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “set of numbers” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
For help about classification, see Wikidata:Classification.
- Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
- Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
- ⟨
set of numbers⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Shouldn't set of numbers (Q3054943) be an instance of third-order class (Q24017465) instead of second-order class (Q24017414) because every instance of set of numbers (Q3054943) is, itself, a set/class? The-erinaceous-one (talk) 21:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
- Instances of set of numbers (Q3054943) are not metaclass but class (set), so set of numbers (Q3054943) is a second-order class (Q24017414). If X is an instance of third-order class (Q24017465), instance of X is an instance of second-order class (Q24017414). --Okkn (talk) 06:23, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- Ah, okay. So we have set of numbers (Q3054943) (first-order metaclass) contains set of integers (Q47007735) (a class) which contains -1, 0, 1, etc. (individuals). I think I got it now, thanks for the help! (Side note: the concept of metaclasses is confusing to begin with, but the fact that the names of set of numbers (Q3054943) and set of integers (Q47007735) are so similar--but are at different levels of the ontology, makes it even more difficult.) The-erinaceous-one (talk) 08:56, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- In light of our discussion, set of numbers (Q3054943) should contain "sets of numbers", so the statements set of numbers (Q3054943)subclass of (P279)set (Q36161)
of (P642)number (Q11563) is incorrect, instead it should be set of numbers (Q3054943)subclass of (P279)set (Q36161) of (P642)set (Q36161) of (P642)number (Q11563). Similarly, set of numbers (Q3054943)has part(s) (P527)number (Q11563) should be set of numbers (Q3054943)has part(s) (P527)set (Q36161) of (P642)number (Q11563). Unless set of numbers (Q3054943)has part(s) (P527)number (Q11563) actually means that every instance of set of numbers (Q3054943) has parts that are numbers. Does the property of a metaclass apply to the metaclass itself, or its instances? The-erinaceous-one (talk) 09:10, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- In light of our discussion, set of numbers (Q3054943) should contain "sets of numbers", so the statements set of numbers (Q3054943)subclass of (P279)set (Q36161)
- Ah, okay. So we have set of numbers (Q3054943) (first-order metaclass) contains set of integers (Q47007735) (a class) which contains -1, 0, 1, etc. (individuals). I think I got it now, thanks for the help! (Side note: the concept of metaclasses is confusing to begin with, but the fact that the names of set of numbers (Q3054943) and set of integers (Q47007735) are so similar--but are at different levels of the ontology, makes it even more difficult.) The-erinaceous-one (talk) 08:56, 1 September 2020 (UTC)