One project that I think is related to Wikilambda's goal of developing a
comprehensive repository of functions is the "Function hub" (
https://fno.io/hub/search) that was developed during Ben de Meester's Phd
as part of the Function ontology (https://fno.io/).
I think it can be considered as part of the related work and maybe gather
some inspiration from it.
--
-- Best regards, Jose Labra
-- http://labra.weso.es
I would like to indicate, for discussion, some theoretical topics pertaining to natural language generation from Wikidata.
An interesting feature of Wikidata is that it has sourced statements [1]. We can envision these sources and materials, the provenance of statements, propagating from the statements, through potential intermediate representations, to output natural language articles. In automatically-generated articles, these sources and materials could appear – as one might expect – as citations referring to referenced sources and materials which appear in “References” sections.
Also interesting is that, should Wikidata come to support automated reasoning [2], it could be implemented in such a way that the enhanced provenance data (e.g. reasoning supporting, argumentation, proofs) for statements could similarly propagate from the statements, through intermediate representations, to output natural language articles.
That is, automatically-generated articles could provide reasoning supporting, arguments for, and/or proofs of the contents of natural language sentences in a manner similar to how they can provide referenced sources and materials.
Any thoughts on these topics?
Best regards,
Adam
[1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Sources
[2] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Reasoning
There is a list of development tasks for this project at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia/Tasks.
I suggest we add a series of tasks to the above document in a new
development part named PP2 that would start concurrently with part P1. Part
PP2 would be "about producing a broad spectrum of ideas and alternatives
from which a program for natural language generation from abstract
descriptions would be selected."
I have created a draft part PP2 at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abstract_Wikipedia/Tasks#Development_P…
.
As I am sure there are many problems with this very initial draft, I would
ask that the community edit the draft and provide comments, objections,
etc. in the talk page as they see fit.
Thanks,
Chris Cooley
That sounds like a fine crossover question for both lists :)
It feels like initial hypothetical examples could be fleshed out into
separate articles / pages right away.
And tool / extension / gadget designs could reference those.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 7:17 AM Thomas Shafee <thomas.shafee(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Sounds excellent - and I look forward to seeing it grow. Do you think
> specialised extensions/gadgets will be needed initially, or will it be
> possible to start making example/prototype articles straight away?
>
> Thomas
>
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 at 21:11, Stuart Prior <stuart.prior(a)wikimedia.org.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> Glad to hear this as it was my initial thought!
>>
>> S
>>
>> On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 at 03:24, Denny Vrandečić <dvrandecic(a)wikimedia.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I started a conversation today to consider Wikispore as a possible place
>>> for hosting the early content for Abstract Wikipedia.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/abstract-wikipedia/2020-July/thread.h…
>>>
>>> Feel free to chime in.
>>>
>>> Stay safe,
>>> Denny
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikispore mailing list
>>> Wikispore(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikispore
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Stuart Prior*
>> *Project Coordinator*
>> *Wikimedia UK*
>> +44 203 372 0769
>> +44 7879 015 385 (text me otherwise I might screen the call)
>>
>> Wikimedia UK is the national chapter for the global Wikimedia open
>> knowledge movement. We rely on donations from individuals to support our
>> work to make knowledge open for all. Have you considered supporting
>> Wikimedia? https://donate.wikimedia.org.uk
>>
>> Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
>> Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
>> Office Ground Floor, Europoint, 5 - 11 Lavington Street, London SE1 0NZ
>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=5+-+11+Lavington+Street,+London+SE1+0NZ&entry=gm…>
>> .
>>
>> Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The
>> Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate
>> Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent
>> non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility
>> for its contents.*
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikispore mailing list
>> Wikispore(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikispore
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikispore mailing list
> Wikispore(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikispore
>
--
Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
We'd be very glad to host documentation and planning on Wikispore, that
very much fits within our mission of fostering new sister projects, and
hopefully it can help provide a leading example to other nascent sister
project concepts too.
Thanks,
Richard
(User:Pharos)
Hello all,
I have noticed that a large amount of on-wiki discussion is already being generated, which is great!
However, I am concerned that interesting or active discussions will not receive the attention they deserve with so much material. I admit that this concern may be borne out of some amount of unfamiliarity with how these discussions usually operate, but this project seems like the kind to generate a large amount of unfocused discussion that may eventually become useful, so I do think this problem should be addressed for this project .
One idea would be to regularly send an email to this list to highlight some interesting or active on-wiki discussions that deserve the community's attention.
Thanks,
Chris Cooley
The proposal of wikilambda at [0] starts with:
> Wikilambda is a new Wikimedia project that allows editors to create and maintain code. This is useful in many different ways. It provides a catalog of all kind of functions that anyone can call, write, maintain, and use.
[0] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Abstract_Wikipedia#Proposal
Then it goes into:
> It also provides code that translates the language-independent article from Abstract Wikipedia into the language of a Wikipedia. This allows everyone to read the article in their language. Wikilambda will use knowledge about words and entities from Wikidata.
It seems to me that the first part is much different from the second
part. The first part describes some kind of code repository (with
versioning I assume). The second part focus on the main use case for
that repository and describes to some extent what would be the
required or necessary function that can be created inside the
repository. The second part can be understood as the procedure
required by abstract Wikipedia to do its work.
I want to focus on the first part. If I understand correctly
wikilambda is a *wiki for code*, that possibly allows translating
procedure/function, documentation, and really any name into multiple
natural languages. The programming language itself is not fixed yet.
We know that we would like to make it possible to run programs on
various existing programming language interpreter/compiler. That is
already beyond the scope of this email.
Here is the question: Is that correct that wikilambda is a repository
for code that allows us to:
1) create,
2) maintain,
3) localize identifiers and documentation into multiple natural languages
Is that all of wikilambda?