Maarten, thanks for that clarification! Gerard, I totally agree with
you. Personally I was hoping for a way to use WikiData to find Commons
images that was *not* through the gallery/category structures as we
know them, for all the reasons Gerard has mentioned (in this and
previous mails).
Now that I think about it, if you want to create a relationship where
Wiki Commons is a client of WikiData, then I think this should be done
for galleries only, not categories. Galleries can be easily split
and/or merged, reside in more than one category, and offer a "best"
selection of images of the subject, as well as offering a link to more
images on Commons by clicking through to categories.
Jane
2013/8/13, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>om>:
Hoi,
As far as I am concerned, the categories used for images are not really
helpful , While there are many images about Kiribati, you find only a few
in the category by that name. The rest can be found in subcategories.
In the proposal for Commons there is a provision for tags. These tags can
be populated to some extend by the categories they are in.
The reason to have categories is because they are intended to help find
images. Without them and without tags we would not have Commons as a
functioning entity. However, the way they work with all these subcategories
and stuff prevent many people including myself to use Commons as the source
of images when I need them.
So yes, having categories are good in a half arsed way but we should get
rid of them as we can have something better.
One other big advantage of tags is that they are typically single concepts
that have typically have translations either in the labels in Wikidata or
in Wiktionary. This allows us to make Commons a truly multi-lingual
resource.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 10 August 2013 06:19, Maarten Dammers <maarten(a)mdammers.nl> wrote:
Hi everyone,
At Wikimania we had several discussions about the future of Wikidata and
Commons. Some broader feedback would be nice.
Now we have a property "Commons category" (
https://www.wikidata.org/**
wiki/Property:P373 <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P373>). This
is a string and an intermediate solution.
In the long run Commons should probably be a wikibase instance in it's
own
right (structured metadata stored at Commons) integrated with
Wikidata.org,
see
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/**Wikidata:Wikimedia_Commons<https://www.w…
more info.
In the meantime we should make Commons a wikidata client like Wikipedia
and Wikivoyage. How would that work?
We have an item
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/**Q9920<https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q992…
the city Haarlem. It links to the Wikipedia article "Haarlem" and the
Wikivoyage article "Haarlem". It should link to the Commons gallery
"Haarlem"
(
https://commons.wikimedia.**org/wiki/Haarlem<https://commons.wikimedia.o…
)
We have an item
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/**Q7427769<https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q…
the category Haarlem. It links to the Wikipedia category "Haarlem". It
should link to the Commons category "Haarlem"
(
https://commons.wikimedia.*
*org/wiki/Category:Haarlem<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Haarlem>
).
The category item (Q7427769) links to article item (Q9920) using the
property "main category topic" (
https://www.wikidata.org/**
wiki/Property:P301 <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P301>).
We would need to make an inverse property of P301 to make the backlink.
Some reasons why this is helpful:
* Wikidata takes care of a lot of things like page moves, deletions, etc.
Now with P373 (Commons category) it's all manual
* Having Wikidata on Commons means that you can automatically get
backlinks to Wikipedia, have intro's for category, etc etc
* It's a step in the right direction. It makes it easier to do next steps
Small change, lot's of benefits!
Maarten
______________________________**_________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l<https://lists.…