Hi,
TL;DR: Did anybody consider using Wikidata items of Wikipedia templates to
store multilingual template parameters mapping?
Full explanation:
As in many other projects in the Wikimedia world, templates are one of the
biggest challenges in developing the ContentTranslation extension.
Translating a template between languages is tedious - many templates are
language-specific, many others have a corresponding template, but
incompatible parameters, and even if the parameters are compatible, there
is usually no comfortable mapping. Some work in that direction was done in
DBpedia, but AFAIK it's far from complete.
In ContentTranslation we have a simplistic mechanism for mapping between
template parameters in pairs of languages, with proof of concept for three
templates. We can enhance it with more templates, but the question is how
much can it scale.
Some templates shouldn't need such mapping at all - they should pull their
data from Wikidata. This is gradually being done for infoboxes in some
languages, and it's great.
But not all templates can be easily mapped to Wikidata data. For example -
reference templates, various IPA and language templates, quotation
formatting, and so on. For these, parameter mapping could be useful, but
doing this for a single language pair doesn't seem robust and reminds me of
the old ways in which interlanguage links were stored.
So, did anybody consider using Wikidata items of templates to store
multilingual template parameters mapping?
--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore
Hi everyone,
I'd just like to announce another experimental Wikidata SPARQL endpoint
[1], kindly provided by the folks at SpazioDati [2].
It contains both the simplified and the complete dumps, as per [3].
Each dump file is stored under a different named graph.
We are collecting the query logs, and will share the most frequent queries.
Cheers!
[1] http://wikisparql.org/
[2] http://spaziodati.eu/en/
[3] http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-exports/rdf/exports/20150223/
On 3/21/15 1:00 PM, wikidata-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
> On 3/20/15 2:08 PM, Markus Kroetzsch wrote:
>> >Dear all,
>> >
>> >Thanks to the people at the Center of Semantic Web Research in Chile
>> >[1], we have a very first public SPARQL endpoint for Wikidata running.
>> >This is very preliminary, so do not rely on it in applications and
>> >expect things to fail, but you may still enjoy some things.
>> >
>> >http://milenio.dcc.uchile.cl/sparql
> You have a SPARQL that provides access to Wikidata dumps loaded into an
> RDF compliant RDBMS (in this case a Virtuoso RDBMS instance). I emphasis
> "a" because "the first" isn't accurate.
>
> There are other endpoints that provide access to Wikidata dumps:
>
> [1]http://lod.openlinksw.com/sparql -- 61 Billion+ RDF triples culled
> from across the LOD Cloud (if you lookup Wikidata URIs that are objects
> of owl:sameAs relations you'll end up in Wikidata own Linked Data Space)
>
> [2]http://wikidata.metaphacts.com/sparql -- another endpoint I
> discovered yesterday .
--
Marco Fossati
http://about.me/marco.fossati
Twitter: @hjfocs
Skype: hell_j
Hi all,
I am pleased to announce that the Freebase-Wikidata mappings are shared in
public.
http://github.com/Samsung/KnowledgeSharingPlatform
Google is already providing the mapping relation between Freebase and
Wikidata (https://developers.google.com/freebase/data), however, they might
not offer a updated version. We extract a set of identical relations from
both Freebase and Wikidata datasets using Wikipedia links; several
algorithms are also tested to find out same entity pairs. Although this
approach is limited to identifying all same entities of both datasets, it
would be a useful source to understand instances of both data sources. The
source code for extracting this data will also be shared soon.
The data is serialised using the N-Triples format, and the following is the
details of this data:
- Total 4,395,258 triples (same entity pairs)
- Updated: February 13, 2015
- Data Format: N-Triples RDF
- License: CC0
- File size: 236 MB zip
- File size: 2.5 GB (uncompressed)
Feel free to ask me if you have any questions.
Cheers,
Haklae Kim
Senior Engineer
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
scot.kim(a)samsung.com / haklaekim(a)gmail.com
--
Dr.Dr. Haklae Kim
Semantic Web and Open Data Hacker
Open Knowledge Foundation Korea
http://thedatahub.krhttp://getthedata.krhttp://blogweb.co.kr
Tel: +82-(0)10-3201-0714
Who's Who in the World's 27th Edition - 2010
IBC 2000 Outstanding Scientists - 2010
Hi all --
Have we considered separating in some way (in the UI, and possibly the data
model) properties which track identifiers in external databases vs.
properties that describe the item using Wikidata-internal links? As more
and more external identifiers are added, it's easy to get lost in them
while looking for the right property to describe an item.
We're effectively already doing this with Wikimedia identifiers by calling
them "sitelinks" and it seems like a potential logical extension of that
concept to group other kinds of external identifiers in their own section
rather than having CANTIC, BIBSYS identifiers, Freebase identifiers or even
DMOZ links mixed together with the primary descriptors of an author or
work, for example.
Thanks,
Erik
Hello all,
Wikidata consists of millions of single data items, which is great. In
order to facilitate modeling the interactions between the single items, we
hereby suggest using OWL based ontologies (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Ontology_Language).
We think that using ontologies brings several advantages:
-Looking at an ontology (could collaboratively be generated e.g. on
webprotege.stanford.edu) gives a very clear overview of how data is
interconnected. This would allow for modeling of even very large and/or
complex interactions.
-Layouting a data integration project in an ontology first, before really
integrating data into WD facilitates property proposal, as a ontology with
its properties could first be designed and then the ontology with all its
properties and classes could be generated as a whole.
-Data could be queried/exported from WD based on an ontology by simply
selecting the whole or parts of an ontology.
This approach has been suggested and discussed by Benjamin Good, Elvira
Mitraka, Andra Wagmeester, Andrew Su and me. As an example, we put together
draft properties for gene disease interactions, which allows for WD
community discussion of this apporach. A preliminary version can be found
here:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:ProteinBoxBot/GeneDiseaseIteraction_Disc…
Best regards,
Sebastian
Hi Everyone,
2015 is an election year for the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia
Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees> as well
as for the Funds Dissemination Committee
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Funds_Dissemination_Committee>.
As you may recall the Board has three directly-elected members who serve
for two years. Currently they are Phoebe Ayers (Phoebe
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Phoebe>), Samuel Klein (SJ
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Sj>) and María Sefidari (Raystorm
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Raystorm>). As in the past years we
rely on an effective election committee to coordinate the elections for us
along with staff support and a Board liaison. Not only do they guarantee
that the election is overseen by an independent body, but they also make
sure that the tremendous amount of work that needs to be done is taken care
of. My job, as this year's Board liaison, is to coordinate the formation of
this committee and to support them in their work while serving as the
primary point of contact with the Board regarding the process..
This is a call for volunteers to serve on the election committee. If you
feel that you can contribute to this committee, please email James
Alexander (Jalexander(a)wikimedia.org) and give a small summary of why you
think you would be able to help out with this process.
The Committee is responsible for planning and maintaining virtually every
aspect of the Board election. For example, the Committee plans the type of
voting, suffrage criteria, and criteria for candidacy, helps to draft and
organize all of the official election pages on Meta, verifies that
candidates and voters meet the criteria, audits votes to ensure there are
no duplicate votes or other problems, et cetera. You can expect that this
work will take an average 5-10 hours a week with a few periods of relative
quiet and a few periods of heavy work during and after each election (the
FDC and Board elections are planned to be separate this year).
If you decide to join the committee you will have to identify to the
Wikimedia Foundation
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_handbook/email_templates#Notificati…>
because
of the personal information you have access too and must be at least 18
years of age. In addition you cannot be part of the election committee if
you are planning to be a candidate or are planning to support any candidate
publicly.
To ensure we get going as quickly as possible, committee members will start
to be seated as soon as we have 4-5 good candidates with an anticipated
first meeting of Friday April 10th (or soon after, depending on committee
availability). The deadline for volunteers, however, is Friday, April 17th
UTC 12:00.
The committee and staff will be setting up the election pages soon and the
call for candidates, led by a letter from the Board, which will be going
out shortly. If you're interested in running for either the Board or the
FDC, I encourage you to read up on prior elections
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2013>and
the groups themselves to prepare your statements!
Regards,
Alice.
--
Alice Wiegand
Board of Trustees
Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate