Wikidata March 2012

wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org

32 participants
41 discussions

[Wikidata-l] Data_model: Metamodel: Wikipedialink
by Gregor Hagedorn 05 Apr '12

05 Apr '12

Apologies, should this already have been discussed. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Notes/Data_model#The_Metamodel defines: Wikipedialink = (Title, LanguageId, Badge?) In my experience the scope or extent of entities in different Wikipedias sometimes differs. One Wikipedia considers an entity a valid lemma, whereas another Wikipedia subsumes it in a larger lemma. Would changing the model to: Wikipedialink = (Title, LanguageId, Relation, Badge?) where relation can be broader match close match exact match narrower match etc. help in expressing these situations? I believe this could prevent problems later on. The default (and initial import of interlanguage links) could easily be "close match" - to be refined only where required. Gregor

7 22

[Wikidata-l] first Wikidata office hour on IRC
by Lydia Pintscher 04 Apr '12

04 Apr '12

Hi everyone! Next week the Wikidata team will be complete and start working at full speed. Finally! \o/ I will be holding the first round of Wikidata office hours next week. You're all invited to ask questions and discuss. If you can't attend there will be logs. * 4. April, German, in #wikimedia-wikidata on freenode, 4:30pm UTC (see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Wikidata+Office+Ho… for different time zones) * 5. April, English, in #wikimedia-wikidata on freenode, 4:30pm UTC (see http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=Wikidata+Office+Ho… for different time zones) I plan to offer these regularly. My (virtual) door is open outside these office hours as well of course ;-) Cheers Lydia http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Community Communications for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Eisenacher Straße 2 10777 Berlin www.wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.

1 1

[Wikidata-l] Notability in Wikidata
by emijrp 02 Apr '12

02 Apr '12

Hi all; I'm thinking about notability in Wikidata and how it may conflict with Wikipedia current policies and community conceptions. Will Wikidata allow to create entities for small villages, asteroids, galaxies, stars, species, etc, that are not allowed today at Wikipedia? Including about those that don't have article in any Wikipedia? I will be happy if so. Regards, emijrp

12 18

[Wikidata-l] Help with Phase 1 + Introduction
by Brent Hecht 01 Apr '12

01 Apr '12

Hello Wikidata Folks, My name is Brent Hecht, and I've done a great deal of research on the differences and similarities between the language editions. I was really excited to hear about the Wikidata project moving forward, and I think some of my research might be of assistance. I'd enjoy being able to help the community make this important transition. In particular, my experience navigating interlanguage link conflicts might be able to help in Phase 1. Please let me know if there's anything I can do over the short term or long term! Some of my relevant papers: [1] Bao, P., Hecht, B., Carton, S., Quaderi, M., Horn, M. and Gergle, D. 2012. Omnipedia: Bridging the Wikipedia Language Gap. CHI '12: 30th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2012). [2] Hecht, B. and Gergle, D. 2010. The Tower of Babel Meets Web 2.0: User-Generated Content and Its Applications in a Multilingual Context. CHI '10: 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Atlanta, GA, 2010), 291--300. [3] Hecht, B. and Gergle, D. 2009. Measuring Self-Focus Bias in Community-Maintained Knowledge Repositories. Communities and Technologies 2009: 4th International Conference on Communities and Technologies (State College, PA, 2009), 11--19. - Brent Brent Hecht Ph.D. Candidate in Computer Science CollabLab: The Collaborative Technology Laboratory Northwestern University w:http://www.brenthecht.com <http://www.brenthecht.com/> e:brent@u.northwestern.edu <mailto:brent@u.northwestern.edu>

4 4

Re: [Wikidata-l] Data model (RDF)
by Jakob Voss 01 Apr '12

01 Apr '12

JFC Morfin wrote: > 2. Since we have a W3C expert: what is the best document/book to get > a comprehensive and clear (not too massive) documentation on the > semantic web? You surely don't want to know all about semantic web - especially the Ontology stuff with OWL dialects and entailment regimes is far too academic and won't be part of wikidata because of computational complexity anyway. In short, you should be *very sceptical* and cautious every time you stumple upon anything that requires inference rules. Even trivial inference rules such as those based on owl:sameAs and rdf:type can be problematic in practice! The less inference you assume, the better. I can recommend the "Linked Data Patterns" book by Dodds and Davis: http://patterns.dataincubator.org/book/ Jakob -- Verbundzentrale des GBV (VZG) Digitale Bibliothek - Jakob Voß Platz der Goettinger Sieben 1 37073 Goettingen - Germany +49 (0)551 39-10242 http://www.gbv.de jakob.voss(a)gbv.de

5 4

Re: [Wikidata-l] Wiki Subject Indexes
by John McClure 01 Apr '12

01 Apr '12

Ivan, Thanks for the reply. Yes as many people should be brought in about subject indexing as can be found. The UDC is a faceted classification; LCC (Lib of Congress Classification) and DDC (Dewey Decimal Classification) are not. UDC is a multilingual taxonomy (facet=language) and these other two are not. To me there's little to no competition with UDC. But that's about what taxonomies are deployed -- I support many and all. It's the implementing technology that's key here and happily doensn't require expert panels and study groups. SKOS can handle multiple facets -- via its Collection objects. I view SKOS as a stepping stone to ISO Topic Maps; I suspect SKOS has been invented by the W3 as a response to Topic Map functionality not in OWL, but perhaps you can enlighten me further. Basically I have these questions. 1. Is WP going to be empowered with subject indexes as a core feature? Is this better an extension? 2. What's the relative priority of subject indexes over other wikidata requirements (ie after Semantic Infoboxes) 3. Should SKOS or a very close equivalent be subsumed into the WOM? The answer to 3 probably should echo the realtionship between the WOM and the OWL, whatever that is intended to be. Thanks, John ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 11:22:43 +0200 From: Ivan Herman <ivan(a)w3.org> To: "Discussion list for the Wikidata project." <wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Wiki Subject Indexes Message-ID: <F67C291D-CE31-4624-AD87-7B3ABCB9B612(a)w3.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Mar 31, 2012, at 02:00 , John McClure wrote: > Hello, > Can/should wiki subject indexes be a functional requirement of the wikidata > project, or of some other? I think navigating a wiki today without a subject > index is difficult, to say the least. A subject index seems such a critical > component for information libraries! WP's portals are a nice step but still, > users seem at the mercy of topical links inserted by authors of the portal. > How much better it would be to have a taxonomy of subjects that can be > associated with a page by ITS author so that the page can be found > independently of portals. I see a major issue with the user interface of this (though I agree with your assessment). It has to be very easy to set the right subject, otherwise people will not do it. The dbpedia people extract some rough classification of the articles. It is not perfect, but may be worth looking at that, too. > The semantics of SKOS, I suggest, should be baked in to wikis. I also > suggest faceted UDC [1] or similar inter/national classification scheme be > one of many that can be referenced by users when browsing any wiki. I > envision that Subjects would be defined in a namespace as fundamental to a > wiki as the Category namespace is. Basically, I can see requesting some > software to correlate my own subject taxonomy with interwikis' (WP's) > tasxonomies, so that I as a user don't have to manually search each > interwiki for content relative to my personal list of subjects. I think the project should reach out to libraries, ie, real experts. The library world is currently looking at the issues of how to redefine cataloging standards, how to make them Linked Data friendly, etc; because that work is still in flux, it may be the ideal time to talk to them. In view of the importance of WP, libraries cannot allow themselves to ignore this (I believe...) Ivan > Is this an idea before its time, something already considered, or something > to consider now? > Thanks for your thoughts. -- john > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Decimal_Classification

2 1

[Wikidata-l] (no subject)
by John McClure 31 Mar '12

31 Mar '12

Ivan, Thanks for the reply. Yes as many people should be brought in about subject indexing as can be found. The UDC is a faceted classification; LCC (Lib of Congress Classification) and DDC (Dewey Decimal Classification) are not. UDC is a multilingual taxonomy (facet=language) and these other two are not. To me there's little to no competition with UDC. But that's about what taxonomies are deployed -- I support many and all. It's the implementing technology that's key here and happily doensn't require expert panels and study groups. SKOS can handle multiple facets -- via its Collection objects. I view SKOS as a stepping stone to ISO Topic Maps; I suspect SKOS has been invented by the W3 as a response to Topic Map functionality not in OWL, but perhaps you can enlighten me further. Basically I have these questions. 1. Is WP going to be empowered with subject indexes as a core feature? 2. What's the relative priority of subject indexes over other wikidata requirements (ie after Semantic Infoboxes) 3. Should SKOS or a very close equivalent be subsumed into the WOM? The answer to 3 probably should echo the realtionship between the WOM and the OWL, whatever that is intended to be. Thanks, John Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 11:22:43 +0200 From: Ivan Herman <ivan(a)w3.org> To: "Discussion list for the Wikidata project." <wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Wiki Subject Indexes Message-ID: <F67C291D-CE31-4624-AD87-7B3ABCB9B612(a)w3.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Mar 31, 2012, at 02:00 , John McClure wrote: > Hello, > > Can/should wiki subject indexes be a functional requirement of the wikidata > project, or of some other? I think navigating a wiki today without a subject > index is difficult, to say the least. A subject index seems such a critical > component for information libraries! WP's portals are a nice step but still, > users seem at the mercy of topical links inserted by authors of the portal. > How much better it would be to have a taxonomy of subjects that can be > associated with a page by ITS author so that the page can be found > independently of portals. > I see a major issue with the user interface of this (though I agree with your assessment). It has to be very easy to set the right subject, otherwise people will not do it. The dbpedia people extract some rough classification of the articles. It is not perfect, but may be worth looking at that, too. > The semantics of SKOS, I suggest, should be baked in to wikis. I also > suggest faceted UDC [1] or similar inter/national classification scheme be > one of many that can be referenced by users when browsing any wiki. I > envision that Subjects would be defined in a namespace as fundamental to a > wiki as the Category namespace is. Basically, I can see requesting some > software to correlate my own subject taxonomy with interwikis' (WP's) > tasxonomies, so that I as a user don't have to manually search each > interwiki for content relative to my personal list of subjects. I think the project should reach out to libraries, ie, real experts. The library world is currently looking at the issues of how to redefine cataloging standards, how to make them Linked Data friendly, etc; because that work is still in flux, it may be the ideal time to talk to them. In view of the importance of WP, libraries cannot allow themselves to ignore this (I believe...) Ivan > > Is this an idea before its time, something already considered, or something > to consider now? > Thanks for your thoughts. -- john > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Decimal_Classification

1 0

[Wikidata-l] Getting started (hobbyist coders)
by Sumana Harihareswara 31 Mar '12

31 Mar '12

Hobbyist coders who are eager to get started might find it useful to start getting familiar with MediaWiki: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_become_a_MediaWiki_hacker and set up their own bleeding-edge MediaWiki installations: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Download_from_Git Other Wikimedia technology projects that you might want to get familiar with: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Developer_hub Hope this helps! -- Sumana Harihareswara Volunteer Development Coordinator Wikimedia Foundation

1 0

[Wikidata-l] Wiki Subject Indexes
by John McClure 31 Mar '12

31 Mar '12

Hello, Can/should wiki subject indexes be a functional requirement of the wikidata project, or of some other? I think navigating a wiki today without a subject index is difficult, to say the least. A subject index seems such a critical component for information libraries! WP's portals are a nice step but still, users seem at the mercy of topical links inserted by authors of the portal. How much better it would be to have a taxonomy of subjects that can be associated with a page by ITS author so that the page can be found independently of portals. The semantics of SKOS, I suggest, should be baked in to wikis. I also suggest faceted UDC [1] or similar inter/national classification scheme be one of many that can be referenced by users when browsing any wiki. I envision that Subjects would be defined in a namespace as fundamental to a wiki as the Category namespace is. Basically, I can see requesting some software to correlate my own subject taxonomy with interwikis' (WP's) tasxonomies, so that I as a user don't have to manually search each interwiki for content relative to my personal list of subjects. Is this an idea before its time, something already considered, or something to consider now? Thanks for your thoughts. -- john [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Decimal_Classification

3 2

[Wikidata-l] Arcticle on Golem.de
by Michael Movchin 31 Mar '12

31 Mar '12

Just FYI: There is an interessting german article on Golem about Wikidata: http://www.golem.de/news/wikidata-eine-datenquelle-fuer-alle-sprachversione… -- Yours sincerely, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Michael Movchin (mmovchin) Volunteer Huggle core developer, conference coordinator and Wikipedia author Freiwilliger Huggle Core-Entwickler, Konferenzkoordinator und Wikipedia Autor

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

Wikidata March 2012