Hi all, I just wanted to make you aware that in these days Wikidata has being launched, and the community is asked to propose schemas and models for Properties. For us, I think it would be very important to give a hand to this: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal#Book_.2F_Buch_.2F_L...
I don't understand well how Wikidata works, we're atill at the early stages, but IMHO it would be great for librarians and wikipedians to work directly on that book model. Wikidata should be interoperable with major metadata schemas, in a way or another.
Regards
Aubrey
On 11 February 2013 09:19, Andrea Zanni zanni.andrea84@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, I just wanted to make you aware that in these days Wikidata has being launched, and the community is asked to propose schemas and models for Properties. For us, I think it would be very important to give a hand to this: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal#Book_.2F_Buch_.2F_L...
I don't understand well how Wikidata works, we're atill at the early stages, but IMHO it would be great for librarians and wikipedians to work directly on that book model. Wikidata should be interoperable with major metadata schemas, in a way or another.
Thanks for the pointer. I'm a little confused by quite what's being aimed for with the datatype here.
Are they planning to use it to represent Wikipedia articles (which are almost all on a work level, sometimes on an item level - eg manuscripts, but very rarely an edition level), or to represent "sources" in citations (usually a specific edition rather than a work or an item)?
As far as I understood (which could be "nothing"), they are asking for community proposal for "properties", which in the Wikidata data model are the "metadata fields" you can predicate about an item (see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Notes/Data_model_primer)
I think they are trying to have a data model for "books" in general, which would be use (probably) for both infoboxes about books (e.g. "en:Pride and prejudice" infobox) and sources (eg Citeweb templates).
But I'm just guessing, I don't know it for sure, I'm confused as you do :-)
Aubrey
PS: I've also found this: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Infoboxes_task_force/works#Work_of_li...
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.ukwrote:
On 11 February 2013 09:19, Andrea Zanni zanni.andrea84@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, I just wanted to make you aware that in these days Wikidata has being launched, and the community is asked to propose schemas and models for Properties. For us, I think it would be very important to give a hand to this:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal#Book_.2F_Buch_.2F_L...
I don't understand well how Wikidata works, we're atill at the early
stages,
but IMHO it would be great for librarians and wikipedians to work
directly
on that book model. Wikidata should be interoperable with major metadata schemas, in a way or another.
Thanks for the pointer. I'm a little confused by quite what's being aimed for with the datatype here.
Are they planning to use it to represent Wikipedia articles (which are almost all on a work level, sometimes on an item level - eg manuscripts, but very rarely an edition level), or to represent "sources" in citations (usually a specific edition rather than a work or an item)?
--
- Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Libraries mailing list Libraries@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
I don't understand if this is or will be in a "poll" phase or not. Also, what exactly should be done about this mess of proposals for item types?
6 Work / Werk / Œuvre
6.1 Creative work / Werk / Œuvre créative 6.1.1 Based on 6.1.2 Creator 6.2 Book / Buch / Livre 6.2.1 Comments 6.2.2 Title / Titel / Titre 6.2.3 Subtitle / Untertitel / Sous-titre 6.2.4 Language / Sprache / Langue 6.2.5 Author 6.2.6 Original title / Originaltitel / Titre original 6.2.7 Translator / Übersetzer / Traducteur 6.2.8 Illustrator / Illustrator / Illustrateur 6.2.9 Edition number / ?-nummer / numéro d'édition 6.2.10 Editor / Herausgeber / Éditeur 6.2.11 Edition / Auflage / Édition 6.2.12 Place of publication / Erscheinungsort / Lieu de publication 6.2.13 Publisher / Verlag / maison d'édition 6.2.14 Date of publication / Erscheinungsjahr / Date de publication 6.2.15 International Standard Book Number / ISBN / ISBN 6.2.16 "Preceded by" and "Followed by" 6.3 Music 6.3.1 premiere (place) 6.3.2 premiere (date) 6.3.3 Album by
Nemo
Something that I thought about when going over this is citations. What property type - if any - are Citations?
Ususally a citation is not fundamental to an article. It's very possible that two different language will cite one article differently. Yet in the cases that either a) two languages share a citation, or b) there is a "seminal" work on the topic, it might be worth having a Citation property to point to in Wikidata.
What's the best way to handle this? I would think that you could have a citation datatype which is a "Pair" the first part of the pair, is the mode of the citation, and the second half would be another wikidata-property. So if you were citing a book, you'd have
Book (Cite mode) | author, edition, isbn (wikidata property)
I don't know if that's encompassing enough. Thoughts?
-----Original Message----- From: Federico Leva (Nemo) [mailto:nemowiki@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 2:07 PM To: Wikimedia & Libraries Subject: Re: [libraries] Call to arms for librarians
I don't understand if this is or will be in a "poll" phase or not. Also, what exactly should be done about this mess of proposals for item types?
6 Work / Werk / Œuvre ...
Nemo
Citations are copyright whoever composes them; however, it is is hard to imagine a citation that would not fall under fair use.
Fred
Something that I thought about when going over this is citations. What property type - if any - are Citations?
Ususally a citation is not fundamental to an article. It's very possible that two different language will cite one article differently. Yet in the cases that either a) two languages share a citation, or b) there is a "seminal" work on the topic, it might be worth having a Citation property to point to in Wikidata.
What's the best way to handle this? I would think that you could have a citation datatype which is a "Pair" the first part of the pair, is the mode of the citation, and the second half would be another wikidata-property. So if you were citing a book, you'd have
Book (Cite mode) | author, edition, isbn (wikidata property)
I don't know if that's encompassing enough. Thoughts?
-----Original Message----- From: Federico Leva (Nemo) [mailto:nemowiki@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 2:07 PM To: Wikimedia & Libraries Subject: Re: [libraries] Call to arms for librarians
I don't understand if this is or will be in a "poll" phase or not. Also, what exactly should be done about this mess of proposals for item types?
6 Work / Werk / Åuvre ...
Nemo
Libraries mailing list Libraries@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
I think perhaps that "property type" here doesn't mean "intellectual property", but wikidata / field types.
However, if it is "intellectual property", in the US a citation would likely not be copyrightable, as it is purely factual information arranged in a standard format.
Laura ---------------------------------- Laura Markstein Quilter / lquilter@lquilter.net Librarian, Geek, Attorney, Teacher
Copyright and Information Policy Librarian University of Massachusetts, Amherst lquilter@library.umass.edu
Lecturer, Simmons College, GSLIS laura.quilter@simmons.edu
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
Citations are copyright whoever composes them; however, it is is hard to imagine a citation that would not fall under fair use.
Fred
Something that I thought about when going over this is citations. What property type - if any - are Citations?
Ususally a citation is not fundamental to an article. It's very possible that two different language will cite one article differently. Yet in the cases that either a) two languages share a citation, or b) there is a "seminal" work on the topic, it might be worth having a Citation property to point to in Wikidata.
What's the best way to handle this? I would think that you could have a citation datatype which is a "Pair" the first part of the pair, is the mode of the citation, and the second half would be another wikidata-property. So if you were citing a book, you'd have
Book (Cite mode) | author, edition, isbn (wikidata property)
I don't know if that's encompassing enough. Thoughts?
-----Original Message----- From: Federico Leva (Nemo) [mailto:nemowiki@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 2:07 PM To: Wikimedia & Libraries Subject: Re: [libraries] Call to arms for librarians
I don't understand if this is or will be in a "poll" phase or not. Also, what exactly should be done about this mess of proposals for item types?
6 Work / Werk / Å’uvre ...
Nemo
Libraries mailing list Libraries@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
Libraries mailing list Libraries@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
All of these are standardized descriptors, which are conventionally used in formal library cataloging, and can easily be determined from standard sources. In some cases, the standard library descriptor conflicts with the general rules in a particular WP for such things as names of people or places. (for example, the rule for place of publication in US cataloging is to transcribe it as given on the object.) But in reference links at enWP we've been following the cataloging in the book description, even if it conflicts with what we would use as an article title; I imagine the intention is to continue that practice.
The only questions I can foresee is whether we need all the fields, & whether we should have others as well. I'll comment there where I think I have something worth saying.
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 7:06 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand if this is or will be in a "poll" phase or not. Also, what exactly should be done about this mess of proposals for item types?
6 Work / Werk / Œuvre
6.1 Creative work / Werk / Œuvre créative 6.1.1 Based on 6.1.2 Creator 6.2 Book / Buch / Livre 6.2.1 Comments 6.2.2 Title / Titel / Titre 6.2.3 Subtitle / Untertitel / Sous-titre 6.2.4 Language / Sprache / Langue 6.2.5 Author 6.2.6 Original title / Originaltitel / Titre original 6.2.7 Translator / Übersetzer / Traducteur 6.2.8 Illustrator / Illustrator / Illustrateur 6.2.9 Edition number / ?-nummer / numéro d'édition 6.2.10 Editor / Herausgeber / Éditeur 6.2.11 Edition / Auflage / Édition 6.2.12 Place of publication / Erscheinungsort / Lieu de publication 6.2.13 Publisher / Verlag / maison d'édition 6.2.14 Date of publication / Erscheinungsjahr / Date de publication 6.2.15 International Standard Book Number / ISBN / ISBN 6.2.16 "Preceded by" and "Followed by" 6.3 Music 6.3.1 premiere (place) 6.3.2 premiere (date) 6.3.3 Album byNemo
Libraries mailing list Libraries@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
I tried to be a bit clearer on what are my doubts. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal#Comments_III
I still think that we should think before at the purposes of Wikidata pages (eg metadata for infoboxes and templates), and then define the metadata. Because as FRBR teach us there are at least 4 "levels" to think of a book, and the metadata needed for these levels are different.
Aubrey
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 5:05 PM, David Goodman dggenwp@gmail.com wrote:
All of these are standardized descriptors, which are conventionally used in formal library cataloging, and can easily be determined from standard sources. In some cases, the standard library descriptor conflicts with the general rules in a particular WP for such things as names of people or places. (for example, the rule for place of publication in US cataloging is to transcribe it as given on the object.) But in reference links at enWP we've been following the cataloging in the book description, even if it conflicts with what we would use as an article title; I imagine the intention is to continue that practice.
The only questions I can foresee is whether we need all the fields, & whether we should have others as well. I'll comment there where I think I have something worth saying.
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 7:06 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand if this is or will be in a "poll" phase or not. Also, what exactly should be done about this mess of proposals for item types?
6 Work / Werk / Œuvre
6.1 Creative work / Werk / Œuvre créative 6.1.1 Based on 6.1.2 Creator 6.2 Book / Buch / Livre 6.2.1 Comments 6.2.2 Title / Titel / Titre 6.2.3 Subtitle / Untertitel / Sous-titre 6.2.4 Language / Sprache / Langue 6.2.5 Author 6.2.6 Original title / Originaltitel / Titre original 6.2.7 Translator / Übersetzer / Traducteur 6.2.8 Illustrator / Illustrator / Illustrateur 6.2.9 Edition number / ?-nummer / numéro d'édition 6.2.10 Editor / Herausgeber / Éditeur 6.2.11 Edition / Auflage / Édition 6.2.12 Place of publication / Erscheinungsort / Lieu depublication
6.2.13 Publisher / Verlag / maison d'édition 6.2.14 Date of publication / Erscheinungsjahr / Date depublication
6.2.15 International Standard Book Number / ISBN / ISBN 6.2.16 "Preceded by" and "Followed by" 6.3 Music 6.3.1 premiere (place) 6.3.2 premiere (date) 6.3.3 Album byNemo
Libraries mailing list Libraries@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
-- David Goodman
DGG at the enWP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
Libraries mailing list Libraries@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries