I agree that the different projects have different requirements. But I
think we should strive for a small number of "Wikidatas" - you could have
made the same argument for Commons, after all.
Right now, I think there is a need for Commons to have better support for
data - we are working on a proposal text for that - and Wiktionary - as it
is really a different system - needs some special treatments - we have just
send a proposal text for that.
For the other projects, access to (one central) Wikidata and the clients be
able to access arbitrary information from Wikidata on any page should be
sufficient for many use cases.
(You can always go further and say "but it would be better if we supported
Wikibooks with structured data about the books and its chapters" etc., but
at some point you need to weigh implementation effort and cost and the
expected benefit)
Cheers,
Denny
2013/6/11 David Cuenca <dacuetu(a)gmail.com>
While on the Hackathon I had the opportunity to talk
with some people from
sister projects about how they view Wikidata and the relationship it should
have to sister projects. Probably you are already familiar with the views
because they have been presented already several times. The hopes are high,
in my opinion too high, about what can be accomplished when Wikidata is
deployed to sister projects.
There are conflicting needs about what belongs into Wikidata and what
sister projects need, and that divide it is far greater to be overcome than
just by installing the extension. In fact, I think there is a confusion
between the need for Wikidata and the need for structured data. True that
Wikidata embodies that technology, but I don't think all problems can be
approached by the same centralized tool. At least not from the social side
of it.
Wikiquote could have one item for each quote, or Wikivoyage an item for
each bar, hostel, restaurant, etc..., and the question will always be: are
they relevant enough to be created in Wikidata? Considering that Wikidata
was initially thought for Wikipedia, that scope wouldn't allow those uses.
However, the structured data needs could be covered in other ways.
It doesn't need to be a big wikidata addressing it all. It could well be a
central Wikidata addressing common issues (like author data, population
data, etc), plus other Wikidata installs on each sister project that
requires it. For instance there could be a
data.wikiquote.org, a
data.wikivoyage.org, etc that would cater for the needs of each
community, that I predict will increase as soon as the benefits become
clear, and of course linked to the central Wikidata whenever needed. Even
Commons could be "wikidatized" with each file becoming an item and having
different labels representing the file name depending on the language
version being accessed.
Could be this the right direction to go?
Cheers,
Micru
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
--
Project director Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 |
http://wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.