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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l