This sounds very similar to the Authority Control elements, which are
tightly controlled.
Is there a related template being used in Wikipedia cf. {{Authority
control}}?
It seems logical to use Database name = value, unless I am not
understanding?
This would be great for other specific data sets, as well. Much more
query-able, too, if they are their own subset?
Erika
*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>*
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Benjamin Good <ben.mcgee.good(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Perhaps it would be more productive if I give a very
specific example.
(I'd prefer a general, wikidata-wide policy but it sounds like that isn't
going to happen.)
We are working on integrating wikidata with many of the ontologies that
are part of the OBO Foundry [1]. These include, for example, the Gene
Ontology and the Disease Ontology. Bringing the concepts represented in
these ontologies in as items in wikidata makes it possible to author claims
that capture knowledge about the relationships between, for example, genes,
biological processes, diseases, and drugs. These claims are thus far
mostly drawn from associated public databases. They serve to populate
infoboxes on Wikipedias and, we hope, will also help foster the growth of
new applications that can help to capture more knowledge for re-use by the
wikidata community. Importantly, these imports also bind the wikidata
community here to the community of biomedical researchers over there.
Establishing a coherent pattern for binding the concepts in these
ontologies to the corresponding items in wikidata is important for two key
reasons:
(1) The ontologies and other linked data resources that use them have a
lot of data that is never likely to get into wikidata and vice versa.
Establishing clear mappings makes it possible to integrate that knowledge
(mostly) automatically. (AKA the whole idea of the semantic web...). The
more consistent the pattern of mapping, the more automation is possible.
(2) It is vitally important to the maintainers of these resources to be
able to track usage of their work products. The more an ontology that is
funded for the purpose of supporting research and knowledge dissemination
can show that it is being used, the better the argument to continue its
funding. When negotiating the import of knowledge products into a CC0
world, it is important that we can demonstrate that the items will
generally remain connected as well as give indications about how they are
being used. (Accepting of course that with CC0 there is no guarantee.)
Given that context, would you support the proposal of using the exact
match property to bind this specific set of biomedical wikidata items to
items defined elsewhere on the semantic web? If not, what would be the
best alternative?
-Ben
[1]
http://www.obofoundry.org