Thread:Help talk:Special property Subproperty of/Relations and Transitivity/reply (2)

Yeah, that's what I'm complaining about :D

Let's say I'm trying to output Ann's spouse's name, say, in an infobox. My query looks like this: or (if we're being refreshingly modern)

Now, IMHO, the name of Ann's husband or wife should be revealed by. Ann's husband is Frank. If Frank is Ann's husband, Frank is Ann's spouse. Who is Ann's spouse? Semantic MediaWiki claims not to know.

Similarly, if I'm displaying a table, I don't feel like I should have to devote two columns to subproperties of Spouse. If I have a Relative property that has as subproperties Mother, Father, Son, Daughter, Brother, Sister, Aunt, Uncle, Stepmother, Stepfather, Stepson, Stepdaughter, and on and on and on into infinity, I hopefully wouldn't need 47 columns in my table, most of which would be empty.

So I feel as though it's an issue with usability. Perhaps some (even most) prefer it the way that it is, or perhaps it's a feature that's not frequently utilized and most people don't care. But I feel as though if you're going to express it in logical terms, you should adhere to those terms. If the relation exists, it exists and should be displayed when queried.

Here's the real issue, though: it's dumb. It doesn't serve any purpose. Here:
 * Why even create this special property if all it's "saving" you from doing is this:

In fact, the second version's better anyway because it doesn't have a stupid extra empty column. And a stupid extra property.