I think there is a case for including this structured data disguised as text but it should go in the reference for a statement On 4 Apr 2015 18:07, "Daniel Kinzler" daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de wrote:
For things that actually *are* free text, and not terribly long, a monolongual (or, in the future, multilingual) text property could be used. "quote" already exists, "abstract" could be added, pending community discussion. Length limitations can be adjusted if need be.
What I was warning against is continuing the misuse of text fields for semi-structured or even fully structured data that I have often seen in GLAM meta-data. That kind of thing should not be copied to Wikidata.
Am 04.04.2015 um 14:41 schrieb Valentine Charles:
Hello,
Coming back on my previous email, I do indeed understand that Wikidata
wants
structured data as much as possible. But you might have free-text
information
that might not fit in a given property or even have meaning only as a
free -text
description (abstract, quotes..).GLAM's are for instance very keen on
using
DBpedia because of some long free-text descriptions that are more
readable and
friendly than "dry" metadata for users applications. I guess GLAMs will
continue
to use DBpedia for this purpose if Wikidata doesn't offer it.
-- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer
Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l