Wikidata

wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org

3 participants
4224 discussions

[Wikidata-l] Collaboration opportunity with MegaJoule.org
by Evan Sherwin 20 Jun '12

20 Jun '12

Dear Wikidata Team, My name is Evan Sherwin and I represent a California-based company called Lumina Decision Systems. We are developing a community-sourced information-sharing website, called MegaJoule.org, that specializes in structured numerical information about energy and energy technology. We are very interested in the Wikidata, and would like to discuss the possibility of collaboration. I am not totally sure who I was the right person to contact, so I hope it is OK that I am mailing this list. Much like Wikidata, MegaJoule.org is a community-sourced hub for structured information. The primary focus of MegaJoule.org is the collection and storage of numerical estimates of quantities like "the projected cost of installing residential solar panels in 2020," or "the current efficiency of utility-scale wind turbines." In addition to a numerical value and units, each estimate contains a wealth of metadata, including the source, technology and metric applicable, along with assumptions, uncertainty information, the year the estimate applies and more. Users create estimate, source, metric and technology records through a form-based interface, resulting in structured and highly searchable data. In addition, users can rate and discuss estimates, their sources, metrics, etc. We have also integrated a graphing tool that allows users to interact more meaningfully with the data in MegaJoule.org. From looking at the description of Wikidata, it seems like there are enough similarities between MegaJoule.org and Wikidata to allow for very fruitful collaboration in the field of energy, and perhaps even some direct data sharing. Would Wikidata be interested in collaborating with MegaJoule.org? Here is a link to our beta version: www.megajoule.org. I have also attached a document that describes the MegaJoule project in more detail. If you have any questions, please let us know. Sincerely, Evan Sherwin Associate Analyst, Lumina Decision Systems evan(a)lumina.com

3 3

[Wikidata-l] Wikidata Roundtable in Washington, DC
by Nicholas Michael Bashour 18 Jun '12

18 Jun '12

Dear all, Some of you may know, but some of you may not, that Wikimedia District of Columbia along with Sunlight Labs will be hosting a roundtable discussion on Wikidata and global open data this Thursday at the Sunlight Foundation offices in Washington, DC (see here: http://wikidataroundtable.eventbrite.com/). Katie Filbert, one of our Board of Directors members who's also on the development team for Wikidata, will be one of the speakers. If anyone on this list is in or near Washington, DC, please RSVP and join the discussion on Thursday. If not, please use this threat to discuss questions that you might want raised during the brainstorming session, or comments that you want to share with everyone there about Wikidata and its potential role in the global open data movement, etc. This discussion will not be focused solely on the technology or the development process of Wikidata, but also what features may make it useful to open data and other NGOs around the world, how to maximize its usefulness, how to ensure its success upon launch, and how to get the most people involved. We hope that following this event and before Wikimania, we will write a report with a set of suggestions and comments that we can deliver to the Wikidata team members who will be in attendance at Wikimania in July. Sincerely, Nicholas Michael Bashour President Wikimedia District of Columbia Washington, DC, USA

1 0

[Wikidata-l] Beyond phase 3: charts, table filtering and sorting etc.
by Jan Kučera 18 Jun '12

18 Jun '12

Hi there, it is probably to early to think about phase #3 (lists), but success of this phase will largely be in integrating the wikidata output into Wikipedia tables nicely. I think about various live tables with all sorts smart functions available, like column filtering, dynamic calculations (counting sums, average values etc.), charting etc. I know big part of this functionalities will be on Wikipedia side, but I fear there simply will not be wikidata integration enough in this was if your project does not take it into account... Has anyone been thinking about this issue? Kozuch

3 2

[Wikidata-l] job opportunity: quality assurance
by Lydia Pintscher 18 Jun '12

18 Jun '12

Heya folks :) As hinted previously we are now looking for another person to join the team. We are looking for someone to help with quality assurance. You can find all the details here: http://wikimedia.de/wiki/English_Version Please consider applying if this fits your profile. An awesome team and fun work is waiting for you. Oh and please spread the word among your friends. Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Community Communications for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Obentrautstr. 72 10963 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 0

Re: [Wikidata-l] Collaboration opportunity with MegaJoule.org
by Nadja Kutz 18 Jun '12

18 Jun '12

Von: Nadja Kutz <nadja(a)daytar.de> Datum: 14. Juni 2012 11:21:28 MESZ An: "Discussion list for the Wikidata project." <wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Betreff: Re:Re: [[meta:wikitopics]] updated Hello Evan Sherwin We just had a discussion in this thread (see http://article.gmane.org/gmane.org.wikimedia.wikidata/618) about companies who might be interested in a standartized way to represent meta-information. In fact since some while I am trying to make people think about the importance of a mathematical sound structuring and presentation of RDF standards for science and engineering applications, especially with respect to environmental issues, please see the article: http://www.azimuthproject.org/azimuth/show/Examples+of+semantic+web+applica… It might be interesting for you to hear that sofar the math and physics community did not react much on that - eventually this may be because it is a rather tedious, unrewarding work to implement such standards ? But there is in general and globally not so much support especially of mathematics, so it just may that it is right now a bit too much of a burden to the math community, next to the normal math tasks. And as you can see by our discussion in the thread the ISO seems to be equally hesitating. The above article is currently only located at the Azimuth project www.azimuthproject.org, which is a circle of mostly scientists who try to openly gather and structure environmental data. In the article there is also a description of a student project where visualization tools for RDF data where created. I had hoped that the students would put their software on sourceforge or so (and that I could announce this in the article about the semantic web applications), but they seem to be very busy these times, eventually they might even be now in internships at rather wellknown giant californian software industries :) The promotion of the article as a publication on the Azimuth project was sofar not so big. This may be because Azimuths public outreach program may not yet be overly advanced :). So my plan is currently to put the article on arxiv.org with the hope that some more mathematicians/scientists may get interested in these kind of tasks.

1 0

Re: [Wikidata-l] [[meta:wikitopics]] updated
by jmcclure＠hypergrove.com 16 Jun '12

16 Jun '12

1. as mentioned several times, a standard for us to be considered must be free. Free as in "Everyone can get it without having to pay or register for it. I can give it to anyone legally without any restrictions." Free of patents. Free as in W3C. 2. I have taken another look at your page, and after starting to read it you simply loose me. You use so many terms without defining them. To give just a few examples: * "The NIF ontology is incorporated into the ontology for Wikitopics which shapes API designs." I do not know what the Wikitopics ontology is. The section beneath just lists a few keywords, but does not really explain it. I do not know what it means for ontologies to incorporate one another. I do not know what it means for an ontology to shape API designs. * "Wikipage naming conventions are used to name subobjects in an equally meaningful manner". Equally meaningful? To what? What does this even mean? You completely lost me here. * For the key wikipage transclusions, you do not explain what a "formatted topic presentation" is, a "formatted topic index", or a "formatted infobox". I think I understand the latter, but not the previous two. What are they? And if I indeed understand it right, are you saying that infoboxes have to be completely formatted in Wikidata, as Gregor has asked? Hello Denny, 1. There are likely several ways to accommodate your process requirements. And btw, I asked last month but received no response for a citation to relevant MWF policy on this issue, to detect whether your statement reflects the team's ELECTIVE policy or a MWF policy. Where's the benefit from imposing expenses magnitudes greater on everyone, to design develop & socialize solutions already known? And please mention how the wikidata community can be assured that the wikidata team's designs themselves don't infringe someone else's patent or copyright, a reassurance that would directly follow from MWF's purchase of rights to use an ISO standard. 2a. Surely you appreciate that Wikidata involves fielding ''some'' ontology, at least as suggested by your intention to include the (SMW) Property namespace. I don't know when you plan to publish wikidata's ontology, but certainly it must be done so overtly and soon, agile or not. I agree the ontology I proposed needs much fleshing out, but chief goals of the proposed ontology are pretty clear -- to provide a wiki-topic index, to support NIF tools directly, to capture provenance data, to reuse existing SMW tools and key international standards, and to establish various best-practices for the wider community. 2b. An ontology that 'shapes/controls API interfaces' means that the APIs' information model must align with the information model represented by the ontology. If the ontology includes an expiration-date as a required property, for instance, then the API needs to include an expiration-date as a required parameter in some fashion. 2c. One ontology incorporating another is perhaps a clumsy way to describe the process of associating a class or property defined in one ontology, to another in a different ontology, either through a subclass/subproperty relation or a documented or implemented transform. 2d."Equally meaningful" as the wiki-page naming conventions are, eg interwiki:lang:ns:pgnm is quite meaningful ... I am proposing SMW subobjects be named similarly, eg scope:lang:type:name, is the proposed structure for SMW subobject names. 2e. A 'formatted topic presentation' is the content displayed on a page for a topic. Wikidata will have a page called (Main:)Thomas Jefferson that displays a formatted topic presentation, showing information harvested from other wikis plus any information developed by the wikidata community itself. Using transclusion, anyone can embed (Main:)Thomas Jefferson into their wiki. A 'formatted topic index' (which certainly can be one part of a topic's formatted presentation) is a snippet that corresponds to the "Thomas Jefferson" heading in a subject index under which are many subtopics eg Jefferson, Thomas [1] [2] [3] -- Early years [4] [5] [6] -- Birth [7] [8] -- Formative influences [9] [10] -- etc 2f. Perhaps you missed my immediate reply [1] to Gregor. Yes all infoboxes (among other non/formatted artifacts) are '''transcluded''' from wikidata, without the nonsense of cross-wiki API calls for individual data-items, as I understand the wikidata team is now gearing to provide. Best regards - jmc [1] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikidata-l/2012-May/000588.html , for instance

11 43

Re: [Wikidata-l] [[meta:wikitopics]] updated
by Nadja Kutz 15 Jun '12

15 Jun '12

John McClure wrote: "Of course, thanks for the pointer. Yes, I'd agree that 19788's ontology be closely reviewed for inclusion. 19788:2 standardizes the Dublin Core properties, the same I recommend for [[wikidata]] provenance data, the same slated for the [[wikidata]] ontology. But more to your point is that the entire ISO corpus would fit really well if it were viewed as a topic map whose topics and sub-topics can be referenced from [[wikidata]] artifacts such as property definitions." Hello John Frankly speaking I don't see why one would want to use topic maps. That is RDF triples are after an identification (canonical: elements with the same URI are identified) a labeled graph, here to be called "the" RDF graph. (I know that some people call the triples themselves "the" RDF graph, but why use a second word (namely graph) for triples? Triples are very trivial highly disconnected graph.). If I want to connect certain nodes of that graph to a topic I only need to supply these nodes with an extra triple which says ("this node belongs to this topic", i.e. something like (node, belongsto,thistopic) ) or modify the canonical identification map and the RDF graph will be a "topic map" or one has the case that the triples are already set out in "topics" that is for example if I have a set of triples with the same resource URI then upon canonical identification these are a kind of "topic map" (with all "legs" pointing in one direction) or am I missing out something crucial? However if you start with topics, you have no canonical information about the "internal structure" of a topic and in some cases you would need to artificially impose this in retrospect onto the datastructure. Like if your topic is "members of a society" , you have all the members and you would need some internal structure like a hierarchy then you would need to supply each member with a hierarchy classification (i.e. with extra data, which is usually different for each member). For the RDF case the person who gave you the triples could have made a choice of order which could be given upon canonical identification. I.e. in principle the internal structure depends on your identification map but there is a canonical one. You can of course mimick a RDF triple with a topic map by choosing the topic to be the ressource and one "leg" of your topic as a property and the topic which is connected with this "leg" as the object, but the choice of a leg is not canonical if there is more than one leg. Only if you would make all "legs" of a topic map into triples you would have something like a canonical assignment. I find these differences important. But may be I have overseen something or misunderstood about topic maps (I read about this issue what I found scattered around in the internet so this is not so unprobable). I had this kind of discussion with people from deepa mehta http://www.deepamehta.de/ because they used topic maps, but sofar nobody there could convince me about the distinguished advantages of topic maps. But the discussion was sofar rather brief. The discussion was because we discussed to what extend it would be possible to merge a student project we had at HTW Berlin ( a collaboration platform for visualizing RDF data called Mimirix http://www.daytar.de/art/MIMIRIX/) with deepa mehta, like for example one could use at least the backend, which has already a layout for access control (the deepa mehta people told me that they haven't yet really attacked the issue of access control) or one could use at lease the carefully designed client. May be you have other arguments for topic maps, as said I might have missed out something. I understand that there are other issues like the speed of adressability or direct access issues but these are then rather an issue of the serialization I find. So I didn't understand why for example the pregiven JSON structure of an JSONarray http://www.json.org/javadoc/org/json/JSONArray.html is not used in JSON-LD http://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld-syntax/#sets-and-lists but thats another topic. In the context of applications of ISO metadata you may want to read: http://www.azimuthproject.org/azimuth/show/Examples+of+semantic+web+applica…

2 3

[Wikidata-l] weekly summary #10
by Lydia Pintscher 15 Jun '12

15 Jun '12

Heya folks :) This is the Wikidata summary of the week before 2012-06-15 You can find the wiki version at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Status_updates/2012_06_15 = Development = * Reorganized the three git repos for our extensions into one. (This made us very happy and will cause fewer tears in the future. ;-)) * Added title normalization * Edits in the repo now have a comment added in the history entry * Sent proposal about interwiki table in MediaWiki core: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2012-June/061069.html * Finalized implementation of user interface for editing and adding aliases * Started review of Wikidata branch with Tim Starling * Untangled Wikibase Libs from Wikibase Repo code (removed cross-dependencies) * Refactored ItemView * Launched 20% code review session * Revised the storyboards for linking between Wikipedias * Checked what is left that absolutely needs to be finished before the demo at Wikimania See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Development/Current_sprint for what we’re working on next. You can follow our commits (https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/q/%28%28status:merged+project:mediawiki/ex…) and view the subset awaiting review (https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/q/status:open+%28project:mediawiki/extensi…). = Discussions/Press = * http://blog.slub-dresden.de/beitrag/2012/06/14/wikipedianer-in-der-slub-heu… * http://semanticweb.com/schema-org-wikidata-google-knowledge-graph-two-great… * http://www.tagesspiegel.de/medien/die-krise-der-wikipedia/6726588.html * http://blog.wikimedia.de/2012/06/12/the-second-month-of-wikidata/ * http://blog.wikimedia.de/2012/06/09/wikidata-needs-a-logo-and-you-can-help/ * Wikitopcs and SMW on the mailing list = Events = see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Events * Wikidata intro in Dresden * upcoming: Wikidata & Global Open Data: a roundtable discussion = other stuff = * We are looking for a logo and already got quite a few awesome submissions http://blog.wikimedia.de/2012/06/09/wikidata-needs-a-logo-and-you-can-help/ Anything to add? Please share! :) Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Community Communications for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Obentrautstr. 72 10963 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 0

Re: [Wikidata-l] Testing
by Snaevar 15 Jun '12

15 Jun '12

>> * The feedback-dialogue behaves strange when clicking on "What is this?" >> (the width of the dialogue changes) >Ok. To be honest I am not sure if we'll fix this but we'll see. It's noted. Actually, this is an Moodbar bug. I have filed a bug for this at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=37624 .

1 0

[Wikidata-l] Wikidata test wikis are getting spammed
by Erik Moeller 14 Jun '12

14 Jun '12

http://wikidata-test-client.wikimedia.de/wiki/Special:RecentChanges It might be best to limit editing, or try to rope stewards into running their anti-spambots there ... -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

3 2

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

Wikidata