Wikidata:Property proposal/service hosted by

service hosted by[edit]

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

Withdrawn

Description	the organization that that electronically hosts this service
Represents	internet hosting service (Q1210425)
Data type	Item
Domain	item
Example 1	OpenStreetMap (Q936) → University College London (Q193196), Bytemark Hosting (Q18159731), Imperial College London (Q189022), Fastly (Q34045622), and more
Example 2	MangaDex (Q110093307) → DDoS-Guard (Q25383150), Path (Q110243985), sdbx.moe (Q110249628). Sibyl (Q110249735) [1]
Example 3	Zoom (Q94979732) → Amazon Web Services (Q456157) [2]
See also	distributed from (P10754)

Motivation[edit]

Many nonprofit internet services share who supports hosting their service so a property would be useful to document this. Lectrician1 (talk) 20:06, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Comment Many things (software, services, platforms, and providers themselves nowadays!) are hosted on servers, cloud, etc. maybe it makes sense to make this a broader property as simply "hosted by"? That way many overlapping uses cases like online service (Q19967801) and service on Internet (Q1668024) being the traditional generic concepts, as well as cloud computing (Q483639) bringing platform as a service (Q1153767) as a resource for hosting nearly any kind of software or software stack (Q7558983) and the many subtypes could all conceivably use a property like this, including up and coming virtual spaces upon many metaverse (Q2632041) yet to come to fruition. One day, I likely will be saying: "I own and manage 2 rooms/zones, one is hosted with ZoomWorlds and the other with MetaGlobe". --Thadguidry (talk) 04:17, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Thadguidry Yeah that's actually the original purpose of this property. It's not limited to just internet services. The limit of this to things that are *electronically* hosted. I didn't want to get it confused with "hosting a party" so that's why it's not called "hosted by". Lectrician1 (talk) 02:44, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose operator (P137) can be used instead with optional object has role (P3831) to note which part of the service is operated by the organisation. Example values for object has role (P3831) would include internet hosting service (Q1210425) and DNS hosting service (Q5205812) (must be a subclass of organization (Q43229)). I'm not opposed to specific sub-properties of operator (P137) for e.g. "DNS hosting provider", "Transit provider", "CDN provider", etc but disagree with needing another generic property duplicating operator (P137). --Dhx1 (talk) 22:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Dhx1

I really don't like using qualifiers here or in-general because potentially creates very inconsistent schemas.

As you might see from the examples, these services do not explicitly specify which organizations host what parts of their software. Therefore, we might not know who exactly is the DNS hoster of CDN provider. I would like those properties, however in cases like the example above, having a broadened property like what is being proposed is the best case for specifying the organizations the support electronic services. Lectrician1 (talk) 02:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support BeLucky (talk) 15:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support ~Namita (talk) 22:06, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't see a need to track who hosts something. It's often not verifiable and can change frequently. I'm not seeing the value. BrokenSegue (talk) 05:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's a difference between providing hosting space (where you put your own server) and providing hardware. This proposal does not seem to take this into account. --Push-f (talk) 06:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Push-f The proposal is purposefully vague in that area since most parties that describe the people who host or support their hosting do not describe the exact role that the organization plays in the actual hosting of their service. Lectrician1 (talk) 14:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly believe that property definitions/descriptions should not be vague. So I think it would be better if the description clearly explained in which cases the property should be used. Even if information is often not available I think ideally there should be some way to express it. Also looking at the related distributed from (P10754) I have a question: Xservice hosted byA, B, C + Xdistributed fromQ, R, S ... in this case it is entirely unclear which servers from which organization are located where. --Push-f (talk) 17:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah this proposal should be narrowed more. Not sure to what though. If you have any ideas, please share them. Lectrician1 (talk) 13:14, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]