Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jun 19, 2026. It is now read-only.
This repository was archived by the owner on Jun 19, 2026. It is now read-only.

Post-V1: cross-period entity continuity (name_history) #13

Description

@Lukianos76

Context

Deferred from Phase 1. The source (Historical Basemaps) has no stable entity identifiers across periods — each of the 53 snapshots is independent. V1 is therefore snapshots-only: each territory id is a slug unique within a snapshot, not stable across years.

Goal

Power the territory panel's name timeline (Roadmap Phase 4) and the name_history field in the ARCHITECTURE.md data model (e.g. Roman Republic → Roman Empire) by resolving entity continuity across snapshots.

Approach (sketch)

  • Use the Wikidata QID already attached during enrichment as a cross-snapshot join key.
  • Group features sharing a QID across years; derive per-period name spans ({ name, from, to }).
  • Handle entities without a QID (~36% today) and many-to-one / splits & merges (empires fragmenting, unions forming) — this is the hard part.

Notes

Significant data-modeling effort with real uncertainty; explicitly post-V1. The pipeline's source isolation and the committed Wikidata cache are the building blocks.

Refs: docs/ARCHITECTURE.md (Territory data model), docs/ROADMAP.md (Phase 4), scripts/pipeline/.

Activity

  1. Lukianos76 commented on Jun 7, 2026

    @Lukianos76
    OwnerAuthor

    Update: the new OpenHistoricalMap-seeded model is year-precise (per-entity from/to + Wikidata QID), and OHM has chronology relations linking successive entities. Cross-period name_history is now structurally feasible under this direction (build name spans from chronology + QIDs). To be tackled after the Europe extraction scales (see #17).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions