Note that in Wikidata we are developping methods and tools to class items in « classes », which in short are sets of real world things or events. In languages like the w3c language and standards OWL2. In this language you can assign a class to an element (a media in the common case) to a class (that can be seen as a better defined category) either by creating a statement « this media belongs to that category » (in Wikidata this is done by using the « instance of » property) or by associating a so called «class expression» in OWL (an analog of a query but more powerful) Then in OWL any item who satisfy the criteria of the query or class expression associated to a class belongs to that class without stating it explicitely. In short, the possibility to assign an arbitrary class to an item when a query is not enough will also be possible with just a metadata repository, we may in the future even be able to mix these two ways to class medias.
2014-08-19 10:14 GMT+02:00 James Heald <j.heald@ucl.ac.uk>:Also there might be queries one might want to run on the categories, which would be another reason to include them in Commons Wikibase.
-- J.
On 19/08/2014 07:00, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
I know the categories in Commons exist. I also know that you do not have to
add categories when an image is uploaded. Many people do not consider the
categories because they are just there and are not easy nor obvious without
a long study.
They are there and they evolve. When the "community" finds that they are no
longer useful, there will be others who still want to work on it. They can,
it is a harmless occupation. Why would we consider removing category
structures as long as someone cares about them ??
Thanks,
GerardM
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l