Gerard,
what about query functionality for example? This has been long promised but shows no real progress.
And why do you think practical cases cannot be implemented using RDF? What is the justification for ignoring the whole standard and implementation stack? What makes you think Wikidata can do better than RDF?
Martynas
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Hell no. Wikidata is first and foremost a product that is actually used. It has that way from the start. Prioritising RDF over actual practical use cases is imho wrong. If anything the continuous tinkering on the format of dumps has mostly brought us grieve. Dumps that can no longer be read like currently for the Wikidata statistics really hurt.
So lets not spend time at this time on RDF, Lets ensure that what we have works, works well and plan carefully for a better RDF but lets only have it go in production AFTER we know that it works well. Thanks, GerardM
On 28 October 2014 02:46, Martynas Jusevičius martynas@graphity.org wrote:
Hey all,
so I see there is some work being done on mapping Wikidata data model to RDF [1].
Just a thought: what if you actually used RDF and Wikidata's concepts modeled in it right from the start? And used standard RDF tools, APIs, query language (SPARQL) instead of building the whole thing from scratch?
Is it just me or was this decision really a colossal waste of resources?
[1] http://korrekt.org/papers/Wikidata-RDF-export-2014.pdf
Martynas http://graphityhq.com
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