Hello,
Yes I might not use the right term here especially if you use it already
in a different context. What I mean is that it would be good to have list
of properties that can be used for a given thing. For instance if you want
to describe a painting here the list of properties you can use.
points
to a page listing some properties that can be used for painting but not all
of them.
Best,
Valentine
2015-04-07 15:15 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kinzler <daniel.kinzler(a)wikimedia.de>de>:
I'm confused by your use of the term "template" here. In the context of
MediaWiki, "template" refers to a bit of wikitext that can be
parametrized and
re-used, e.g. to make info-boxes.
If I understand correctly, what you mean is a kind of schema saying which
properties can and should be present on items of which type. The Wikibase
software has no concept of such schemas, on Wikidata such schemas are
defined
and enforced by convention only.
For the sake of clarity, I suggest to use the term "schema convention"
for this,
to avoid confusion with wikitext templates.
Am 07.04.2015 um 13:12 schrieb Valentine Charles:
Hello,
I wanted to get an overview of all the properties used boy the instance
Painting
Europeana
Data Model.
My initial thought that I would find a representative list
at
http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Visual_arts/Item_structure
but in fact I have found much more properties
used in association with
painting.
So I was wondering whether it would be a good
idea to update the
template
mentioned above with the additional properties.
I think it would be really interesting for GLAMs to have access to to
representative templates listing all the properties used for a given
type of
objects. It would help them to understand
Wikidata and to compare it
with their
own data. I think it would also help mappings
activities. I on behalf of
Europeana would be happy to help in this task and also facilitate the
discussions with GLAMs around Wikidata.
What do you think?
Best wishes,
Valentine
2015-04-04 23:45 GMT+02:00 Stas Malyshev <smalyshev(a)wikimedia.org
<mailto:smalyshev@wikimedia.org>>:
Hi!
> 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.
Maybe if the need of bigger texts arises we can have separate field
type? Right now the storage model is not very good for storing
texts of
non-negligible sizes, especially multilingual
ones (x800 languages).
OTOH, we have a type that allows us to use multimedia by integrating
with Commons. So maybe the same idea with using some other wiki -
quotes? sources? for bigger text snippets would work too? Just
brainstorming here :)
> 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.
Right. I think it may be useful here to understand which kinds of
text
we're talking about which can't be
structured but are big enough to
cause concern. I.e. if it's quotes - we already have wikiquote,
right?
Etc.
--
Stas Malyshev
smalyshev(a)wikimedia.org <mailto:smalyshev@wikimedia.org>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
--
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
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org