Hi GerardM and Nemo,

it is kind of ok, what Nemo said, because the comparison to pixie dust holds.

We are trying to decentralize a lot, which makes everything seem very vague. Probably the same with Tim Berners-Lee's new project: https://solid.mit.edu/

At first glance they offer the same features as Facebook and Twitter, which makes it hard to believe that they will be successful, the trick is here to provide the right incentives and usefulness, which will make the network effect.

The main problem I see is that data quality follows the pareto-distribution. The more data you have and the better the quality, the harder it gets to be even better. Test-driven validation only makes it more efficient, but does not beat the pareto-distribution. Networked data can help here to enable reuse and kind of cheat pareto, but not beat it. If you crack the incentives/network issue it is pixie dust and makes the thing fly.

Working with data is hard and repetitive. We envision a hub, where everybody can upload data and then useful operations like versioning, cleaning, transformation, mapping, linking, merging, hosting is done

Sounds like Wikidata!

@Nemo: In my experience you can't really upload data to Wikidata. It comes with a lot of barriers. In the beginning, I understood the argument, that you couldn't load DBpedia or Freebase since there were no references.
Now I saw stats that half the statements are not referenced anyhow and another third references Wikipedia. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1XX-yzT98fglAfFkHoixOI1XC1uwrS6f0u1xjdZT9TYI/edit#slide=id.g21d2403a1a_0_50 So in hindsight, Wikidata could have started out with DBpedia easily and would have a much better start and be much more developed.

DBpedia's properties are directly related to the infobox properties as all data is extracted there, which Wikidata aims to cover as well, so a perfect match. So the Wikidata community spend a lot of time adding data that could have been just uploaded right from the start and focused on the references.

There is also Cunningham's law (the inventor of wikis): "the best way to get the right answer on the internet is not to ask a question; it's to post the wrong answer." So the extraction errors would have been an incentive to fix them...

Now Wikidata is dealing with this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikidata/2018_Infobox_RfC and we are concerned that it will not reach its goal to the fullest.
We are still very interested to collaborate on this and contribute where we can.

All the best,
Sebastian

On 15.05.2018 07:59, Gerard Meijssen wrote:

Hoi,
We do not provide useful operations like versioning, cleaning, transformation at Wikidata. We do not compare we do not curate at Wikidata.

So when somewhere else they make it their priority and do a better job at it, rejoice, don't mock. The GREAT thing about DBpedia that they are willing to collaborate.

Thanks,

GerardM

On 15 May 2018 at 07:51, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki@gmail.com> wrote:

Sebastian Hellmann, 08/05/2018 14:29:

Working with data is hard and repetitive. We envision a hub, where everybody can upload data and then useful operations like versioning, cleaning, transformation, mapping, linking, merging, hosting is done

Sounds like Wikidata!

automagically

Except this. There is always some market for pixie dust.

Federico

_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

--
All the best,
Sebastian Hellmann

Director of Knowledge Integration and Linked Data Technologies (KILT) Competence Center
at the Institute for Applied Informatics (InfAI) at Leipzig University
Executive Director of the DBpedia Association
Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://nlp2rdf.org, http://linguistics.okfn.org, https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt
Homepage: http://aksw.org/SebastianHellmann
Research Group: http://aksw.org