On 05/04/12 12:20, Martynas Jusevicius wrote:
Hey all,
it doesn't look like reuse of existing concepts and standards is a priority for this project. One cannot build a Semantic Web application by ignoring its main building block, which is the RDF data model. Right now it makes no sense to call Wikidata a "semantic" application.
In my opinion, where Wikidata should be going, is to provide read-write user-friendly, multilingual interfaces for DBPedia. That would be a true Semantic Web application for free and open knowledge. Too bad people cannot get over the wiki mentality. It has worked fine for a while, but it's time to move on.
Please rest assured that we are not ignoring RDF or OWL. The similarities and differences of Wikidata and Dbpedia are explained in a wiki page that Dbpedia and Wikidata people have been working out together in order to avoid any confusions [1].
Markus
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Notes/DBpedia_and_Wikidata
Martynas graphity.org
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 5:51 AM, James HKjamesin.hongkong.1@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
When I glanced over the data model description and found the word 'Snaks' [1] as entity or unit of facts, it created some interpretive confusion. Semantic web already uses some abstract language to describe entity concepts, if possible don't introduce another one just to describe a new concept and if necessary please choose a descriptor that is more self-explanatory.
[1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Data_model#Snaks
Cheers
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Gregor Hagedorng.m.hagedorn@gmail.com wrote:
Would the Word "assertion" be a possible replacement for the neonym "Snak"?
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
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l